Cases 1 - 10 of 28
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00169
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
WEINSCHENK v. UNITED STATES et al
as 1:2022cv01150
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WEINSCHENK
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA, ERIC HOLCOMB, SUZANNE CROUCH and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2333 Civil Remedies: Anti-Terrorism Act of 1991
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv02685
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv02234
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
IMO 2020 Attorney Mass Suspension
as 3:2020mc00017
In Re:
Mark Arnold Werling, John Christopher Havill, Steven Stoy Crone and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv00131
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv00127
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
IMO 2018 Attorney Mass Suspension
as 1:2018mc00026
In Re:
Lauren Kathleen Griffin, Michael John Bellich, Thomas William Belleperche and others
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS, NONPAYMENT OF ATTORNEY REGISTRATION FEES, AND/OR FAILURE TO SUBMIT IOLTA CERTIFICATION
as 1:2018mc00038
Respondent:
ANDREW JOHN ALBRIGHT, MICHAEL EUGENE ALLEN, MANISH SHAILESHKUMAR ANTANI and others
In Re:
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS, NONPAYMENT OF ATTORNEY REGISTRATION FEES, AND/OR FAILURE TO SUBMIT IOLTA CERTIFICATION
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv01099
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 b3 Telephone Consumer Protection Act
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.
