Cases 1 - 10 of 74
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00117
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01143
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00925
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01136
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
IN RE: FAILURE TO COMPLY
as 1:2011mc00053
In Re:
IN THE MATTER OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS AND/OR NONPAYMENT OF ATTORNEY REGISTRATION FEES
Respondent:
DAVID BENJAMIN LEBEAU, HERBERT CHARLES SNYDER, JR., MARK ARNOLD WERLING and others
Peters Broadcast Engineering, Inc. v. PEM Consulting Group, LLC et al
as 1:2021cv00219
Defendant:
Pyramid Consultants & Construction, LLC, PEM Consulting Group, LLC, Chesapeake Insurance and others
Plaintiff:
Peters Broadcast Engineering, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv01786
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00900
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
IMO 2020 Attorney Mass Suspension
as 3:2020mc00017
In Re:
Mark Arnold Werling, John Christopher Havill, Steven Stoy Crone and others
Miller et al v. Miller et al
as 4:2020cv00063
Plaintiff:
Louie E Coble and Jennifer L Miller
Defendant:
Monticello Police Department and Nathaneal C Miller
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2721
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.
