Cases 21 - 30 of 21,064
Anderson v. DecisionPoint Systems, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv04072
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Anderson
Defendant:
DecisionPoint Systems, Inc., Stanley Jaworski, Richard Bravman and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv02262
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv02253
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Brown v. Smith
as 1:2024cv00477
Plaintiff:
Melissa Brown
Defendant:
Nelson Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
United States of America v. Williams (Davis)
as 24-1425
Defendant:
RONALD GLEN DAVIS, TERRENCE WILLIAMS, ALAN ANDERSON and others
Not Yet Classified:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Styles et al v. The Bank of Missouri et al
as 3:2024cv03137
Plaintiff:
Auria Styles, Tynia Baisden, Chilette Brown and others
Defendant:
The Bank of Missouri, First Electronic Bank, Concora Credit Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
G and G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. John Zapp et al
as 2:2024cv04270
Plaintiff:
G & G Closed Circuit Events, LLC
Defendant:
John Zapp, Everett Ashley Smith and Savo LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed Question: Fed Communications Act of 1934
United States of America v. Smith
as 24-1384
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER SMITH and Sealed Defendant 1
Not Yet Classified:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Smith-El v. Michigan, State of et al
as 5:2024cv11370
Plaintiff:
Sheik D. Smith-El
Defendant:
Michigan, State of, Dana Nessel, Detroit Land Bank Authority and others
Lucille Farrell-Scott, et al v. Committee of Managers of Llewellyn Park, et al
as 24-1965
Plaintiff:
LUCILLE FARRELL-SCOTT and SUNNE-RYSE SMITH
Defendant:
COMMITTEE OF MANAGERS OF LLEWELLYN PARK and TRUSTEES OF LLEWELLYN PARK
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.
