Cases 71 - 80 of 86
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2010cv06209
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2010cv06198
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2010cv00301
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601 Truth in Lending
James Gordon, Jr., et al v. First Premier Bank Inc., et al
as 10-35027
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES S. GORDON, Jr. and JAMES S GORDON JR'S INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE/ INTERACTIVE, a sole proprietorship
Defendant - Appellee:
FIRST PREMIER BANK INC. and JOHN 1-10 DOES
James Gordon, Jr. v. SubscriberBase Holdings, Inc, et al
as 10-35028
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES S. GORDON, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
SUBSCRIBERBASE HOLDINGS, INC, SUBSCRIBERBASE, INC. and JOHN 1-10 DOES
James Gordon, Jr. v. Commonwealth Marketing Group, et al
as 10-35030
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES S. GORDON, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN 1-10 DOES and COMMONWEALTH MARKETING GROUP INC., a Pennsylvania Corporation
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2009cv06674
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
Stevens v. Colt et al
as 3:2009cv00487
Plaintiff:
Charles Thomas Stevens
Defendant:
Ken Colt, John Hoopes and John 1-10 Does
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Jennifer Jones v. NovaStar Financial, et al
as 09-8007
Respondent:
Jennifer Jones
Petitioner:
Novastar Financial, Inc., Scott F. Hartman, Gregory S. Metz and others
Gracey et al v. Optiver US, LLC
as 1:2008cv06842
Plaintiff:
Roberto Calle Gracey, Roberto Calle Gracey, Roberto Calle Gracey and others
Defendant:
Optiver US, LLC, Optiver Holding BV, Optiver VOF and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
