Cases 61 - 70 of 99
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2011cv00301
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 1821 Default of Loan by Promissary Note
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv00651
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1087
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv00107
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv04523
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1080
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2010cv00781
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1080 Student Loan Recovery
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv04282
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1080
Copeland v. Treasure Chest Casino, L.L.C. et al
as 3:2010cv00603
Plaintiff:
Alvin C. Copeland
Defendant:
Robert Guidry and Treasure Chest Casino, L.L.C.
ThirdParty Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal-Breach of Contract
United States of America v. Megen Construction Company, Inc. et al
as 3:2010cv00456
Defendant:
Megen Construction Company, Inc., Neace Lukens-Cincinnati, Traveler's Casualty and Surety Co. and others
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
Hoang v. National Board of Medical Examiners of the United States of America
as 2:2010cv01888
Defendant:
National Board of Medical Examiners of the United States of America
Plaintiff:
Canh M. Hoang
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Deschoolmeester et al v. Cartus Corporation et al
as 2:2010cv01538
Plaintiff:
David Deschoolmeester and Christine Dick
Defendant:
Cartus Corporation and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
