Cases 81 - 90 of 91
Lhota v. Perez et al
as 2:2010cv00763
Plaintiff:
William G. Lhota
Defendant:
Clotilde Perez, Zenaida Perez, Timothy T. Lainhart and others
Counter_claimant:
Daniel McMahon
Counter_defendant:
William G. Lhota
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2009cv01910
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Grant v. Wachovia Mortgage FSB
as 0:2009cv60520
Plaintiff:
Patsy Grant
Defendant:
Wachovia Mortgage FSB and Wachovia Mortgage FSB
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Grant v. Wachovia Mortgage, FSB
as 0:2009cv60521
Plaintiff:
Patsy Grant
Defendant:
Wachovia Mortgage, FSB and Wachovia Mortgage, FSB
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Grant v. Furr
as 9:2009mc80153
Appellant:
Leland Bernard Grant
Appellee:
Robert C. Furr
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Type:
Other Statutes
Dewey v. Johnson et al
as 9:2008cv80344
Plaintiff:
Brian C. Dewey
Defendant:
Grant Johnson, Benevolent Capital Partners and Burnlounge, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Smith v. Grant et al
as 6:2007cv01891
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Earl Smith, Jr.
Defendant:
Anthony Grant, Mrs. Anthony Grant, Marylin Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Grant et al v. Parker et al
as 2:2007cv00717
Plaintiff:
Nancy Jo Grant, Adeline Hudson and Johnnie Henry Smith, Jr.
Defendant:
James S. Parker, Vernon L. Keen, Donald Hartery and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Antitrust
Grant et al v. Parker et al
as 2:2007cv00651
Plaintiff:
Nancy Jo Grant and Kevin Edwin Daughtrey
Defendant:
James S. Parker, Robert B. Bennett, Jr., Lee E. Haworth and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Case name not on file
as 2:2007mc00023
Defendant:
Grant Thornton International
Cause Of Action: Motion to Compel
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.
