Cases 11 - 20 of 21
Pullins et al v. Palmero
as 1:2009cv10584
Plaintiff:
Wayne E. Pullins, David E. Pullins and Dianne H. Pullins
Defendant:
John Palmero
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Sissel et al v. Klimley et al
as 1:2009cv04527
Plaintiff:
D. Kent Sissel, Timothy Sissel, Amanda White and others
Defendant:
Laura Klimley, Laura Klimley, Maxine Eimicke and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Sissel et al v. Klimley et al
as 7:2009cv04527
Plaintiff:
D. Kent Sissel, Timothy Sissel, Amanda White and others
Defendant:
Laura Klimley, Maxine Eimicke, John Palmero and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Sissel, et al v. Klimley, et al
as 3:2008cv00062
Plaintiff:
D Kent Sissel, D Kent Sissel, D Kent Sissel and others
Defendant:
Laura Klimley, Maxine Eimicke, John Palmero and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Cohain et al v. Klimley et al
as 7:2008cv05047
Plaintiff:
David Cohain, Cynthia Cohain, Yosaif Cohain and others
Defendant:
Laura Klimley, Maxine Eimicke, John Palmero and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Cohain et al v. Klimley et al
as 1:2008cv05047
Plaintiff:
David Cohain , Cynthia Cohain , Yosaif Cohain and others
Defendant:
Laura Klimley , Maxine Eimicke, John Palmero and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964
Pullins et al v. Palmero
as 3:2008cv00118
Plaintiff:
Wayne E Pullins, David E Pullins and Dianne H Pullins
Defendant:
John Palmero
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Garden City Boxing Club, Inc. v. Los Palmeros Restaurant et al
as 1:2007cv04481
Plaintiff:
Garden City Boxing Club, Inc.
Defendant:
Los Palmeros Restaurant and Hector M. Cruz
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 605 Unauthorized publication or use of communications
PALMERO V DVA
as 06-7285
Claimant-Appellee:
George A. Palmero
Respondent-Appellant:
R. James Nicholson, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
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.
