Cases 61 - 70 of 98
Quintana v. M&T Bank Corporation
as 1:2016cv20422
Plaintiff:
Jose Quintana
Defendant:
M&T Bank Corporation
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Collelo v. M&T Bank Corporation
as 8:2016cv00225
Plaintiff:
Antoinette Collelo
Defendant:
M&T Bank Corporation
Cause Of Action: Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
Foust v. Bayview Loan Servicing, a Delaware LLC et al
as 4:2016cv05001
Plaintiff:
Gary Foust
Defendant:
Bayview Loan Servicing , Northwest Trustee Services LLC and M&T Bank Corporation
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv09156
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Jaroslawicz v. M&T Bank Corporation et al
as 1:2015cv00897
Plaintiff:
David Jaroslawicz
Defendant:
M&T Bank Corporation, Hudson City Bancorp Inc. , Robert G. Wilmers and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Marchak et al v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. et al
as 1:2015cv04297
Plaintiff:
Connie Boccia, Frank Boccia, Margot Boccia and others
Defendant:
HSBC North America, Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. v. M&T Bank Corporation
as NYS/1:15-cv-02167
Plaintiff:
Maxim Integrated Products, Inc.
Defendant:
M&T Bank Corporation
Martinez v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation et al
as 0:2015cv60677
Plaintiff:
Tam Marie Martinez
Defendant:
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and M&T Bank Corporation
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv00409
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
M&T Bank Corporation v. Hopf et al
as 1:2014cv01569
Plaintiff:
M&T Bank Corporation
Defendant:
Stephen J. Hopf and Mainetti, Mainetti & O'Connor, P.C.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
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.
