Cases 101 - 110 of 1,304
MARGOLIS et al v. CECIL
as 1:2022mc00022
3Rd Party Defendant:
JAMES MARGOLIS
Plaintiff:
ROY S. MOORE
Defendant:
GUY CECIL
United States of America v. Burrell (Durell Guy)
as 22-421
Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant:
Nico Burrell, AKA Zico Nico, Douglas McLarty, AKA Q-Don, AKA Q-Dizzy, Gerard Bass, AKA Roddo and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Durell Guy
Sadiq et al v. Smilowitz et al
as 1:2022cv01066
Plaintiff:
Ali-Abdullah Sadiq and Ellen J. Sadiq
Defendant:
Alan Smilowitz, R.T.N.Y. Realty LLC, Guy R. Vitacco, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00500
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Guy v. Covidien, Inc. et al
as MA/1:22-CV-10116
Plaintiff:
Guy and Vance Guy
Defendant:
Covidien, Inc, Covidien LLC doing business as Covidien LP formerly known as Tyco Healthcare Group LP, Covidien, Inc. and others
Zhang v. Garland
as 22-1068
Petitioner:
GIU GUI ZHANG, a/k/a Qiu Gui Zhang
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
USSEC v. Robert Russell, et al
as 22-55093
Plaintiff / Appellee:
U.S. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Defendant / Appellant:
ROBERT WILLIAM RUSSELL
Defendant:
GUY SCOTT GRIFFITHE, RENEWABLE TECHNOLOGIES SOLUTION, INC. and GREEN ACRES PHARMS, LLC
Rhone v. McDonough
as 22-1360
Claimant:
GUY C. RHONE
Respondent / Appellee:
DENIS MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Kretsch et al v. Newman
as 2:2021cv02189
Petitioner:
Karla Kretsch, Donald and Karla Kretsch Family Trust, dated December 17, 2007 and Donald and Karla Kretsch Family Trust Dated December 17, 2007
Respondent:
Guy James Newman
Cause Of Action: 9 U.S.C. § 9
James Guy v. Warden, Ross Corr Institution
as 21-4164
Petitioner / Appellant:
JAMES GUY
Respondent / Appellee:
WARDEN, ROSS CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
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.
