Cases 31 - 40 of 64
Muhammad v. Reese Law Group, APC et al
as 3:2016cv02513
Plaintiff:
Sabrina Muhammad
Defendant:
Reese Law Group, APC , Ford Motor and Credit Company and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
REESE et al v. GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION
as 5:2016cv05165
Plaintiff:
EARL REESE , Walter Chruby , STEPHEN OROSZ, JR. and others
Defendant:
Global Tel*Link Corporation
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0277
Reese v. Reese
as 8:2016cv02268
Plaintiff:
Carla Renita Ming Reese
Defendant:
Kelvin Lamar Reese
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 11601
Reese v. Army Fleet Support, LLC
as 2:2016cv00227
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Reese
Defendant:
Army Fleet Support, LLC
Cause Of Action: 38 U.S.C. § 4311
Treasury Department of the Commonwealth et al v. Gregor et al
as 1:2016cv00351
Plaintiff:
Treasury Department of the Commonwealth and Timothy A. Reese
Defendant:
David Gregor and MoneyGram Payment Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BAKER et al v. FIRST ADVANTAGE LNS SCREENING SOLUTIONS, INC.
as 2:2015cv06317
Plaintiff:
BAKIRA BAKER , EARLE WAYNE BROWN , DAVID ALLARD and others
Defendant:
FIRST ADVANTAGE LNS SCREENING SOLUTIONS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Donoho v. Ford Motor Credit Company, LLC et al
as 3:2015cv02612
Plaintiff:
Christopher Donoho
Defendant:
Ford Motor Credit Company, LLC, Rubin & Rothman, LLC and Reese Law Group
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Robert Newton v. Ray Mabus
as 15-2058
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT NEWTON
Defendant - Appellee:
RAY MABUS, Secretary of Navy, STACY LYNN SHOOK, BRYAN BEARDSLEY and others
Newton v. Mabus et al
as 1:2015cv00905
Plaintiff:
Robert Newton
Defendant:
Ray Mabus, Stacy Lynn Shook, Bryan Beardsley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Reese v. Consolidated Credit Counseling Services, Inc.
as 5:2015cv00397
Defendant:
Consolidated Credit Counseling Services, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Sherry Reese
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 - Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
