Cases 41 - 50 of 1,233
Ameris Bank v. T&M Transport LLC et al
as 8:2024cv00611
Plaintiff:
Ameris Bank, a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital Corporation and Ameris Bank a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital Corporation
Defendant:
T&M Transport LLC, Martha Jo Gardner and Timothy Gardner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Ameris Bank v. STL Grading LLC et al
as 8:2024cv00588
Plaintiff:
Ameris Bank, a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital and Ameris Bank a Georgia state chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital
Defendant:
STL Grading, LLC, Michael Wayne Gibson and STL Grading LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Ameris Bank v. Heavenly Scent Commercial Cleaning Inc. et al
as 8:2024cv00577
Plaintiff:
Ameris Bank, a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital and Ameris Bank a Georgia state chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital
Defendant:
Heavenly Scent Commercial Cleaning, Inc., Howard Derek Niven and Heavenly Scent Commercial Cleaning Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Ameris Bank v. Everlast Investments Group LLC et al
as 8:2024cv00578
Plaintiff:
Ameris Bank, a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital Corporation and Ameris Bank a Georgia state chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital Corporation
Defendant:
Everlast Investments Group LLC and Cortez Derek Allen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
EYM Pizza of Georgia LLC et al v. Pizza Hut LLC
as 3:2024cv00646
Plaintiff:
EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC, EYM Pizza of Illinois, LLC, EYM Pizza of Indiana, LLC and others
Defendant:
Pizza Hut, LLC and Pizza Hut LLC
Counter Defendant:
EYM Pizza of Illinois LLC and EYM Pizza of SC LLC
Cross Defendant:
Eduardo Diaz, EYM Pizza LP and EYM Foods II LLC
Other:
ADR Provider
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Microtel Inns and Suites Franchising, Inc. v. ANS Hospitality LLC et al
as 0:2024cv00905
Plaintiff:
MICROTEL INNS AND SUITES FRANCHISING, INC., a Georgia Corporation and Microtel Inns and Suites Franchising, Inc.
Defendant:
ANS HOSPITALITY LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, RAJNIKANT PATEL, CHETANKUMAR PATEL and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
Ameris Bank et al v. Glowdoc, LLC et al
as 8:2024cv00522
Defendant:
, an individual Bhaviniben Patel, Glowdoc, LLC, a Louisiana Limited Liability Company, Bhaviniben Sureshbhai Patel, M.D. and others
Plaintiff:
Ameris Bank, a Georgia corporation dba Balboa Capital Corporation and Ameris Bank a Georgia corporation doing business as Balboa Capital Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Ameris Bank v. Praise Trucking LLC et al
as 8:2024cv00507
Plaintiff:
Ameris Bank a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital
Defendant:
Praise Trucking LLC and Hentsa Yohanes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Ameris Bank v. Red Star Freight Lines Inc. et al
as 8:2024cv00493
Plaintiff:
Ameris Bank, a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital Corporation and Ameris Bank a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital Corporation
Defendant:
Red Star Freight Lines Inc. and Rade Veskovic
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Ameris Bank v. Marin Logistic Transportation, LLC et al
as 8:2024cv00417
Plaintiff:
Ameris Bank a Georgia state-chartered banking corporation doing business as Balboa Capital Corporation
Defendant:
Marin Logistic Transportation LLC, Leyani Marin and Hugo Marin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
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.
