Cases 1 - 10 of 375
Pace v. Synchrony Bank
as 4:2024cv00662
Plaintiff:
Anthony Pace
Defendant:
Synchrony Bank
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Pace v. TMX Finance, LLC
as 4:2024cv00664
Plaintiff:
Anthony Pace
Defendant:
TMX Finance, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Pace v. U.S. Bancorp et al
as 4:2024cv00665
Plaintiff:
Anthony Pace
Defendant:
U.S. Bancorp and U.S. Bank National Association
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Pace v. OneMain Holdings, Inc.
as 4:2024cv00663
Plaintiff:
Anthony Pace
Defendant:
OneMain Holdings, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Barclay v. Dixon
as 24-92
Defendant / Appellee:
MAKAYLA COOK, Police Officer, Sandusky Police Department, Heirs and Assigns D/B/A Makayla Cook, TIM MCCONAHAY, Warden, Mansfield Correctional Facility, Heirs and Assigns D/B/A Tim Mcconahay, ROBERT A. DIXON, Attorney, Attorney at Law, Heirs and Assigns D/B/A Robert A. Dixon and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LESHAWN MAURICE BARCLAY, a Moor beneficiary, a Emperor, Admiral, Mariner, Merchant, Piloter a private Moor aboriginal ohioan national, and subject of the Al Maroc Shereefian Empire
PACE v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2023vv02149
Petitioner:
JULIE PACE
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
Pace v. McDonough
as 24-1211
Claimant:
CARLTON A. PACE
Respondent / Appellee:
DENIS MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
United States v. Pace
as 23-1231
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
KILO DENZEL PACE
Metal Chem, Inc. v. PBTT INC. et al
as 2:2023mc50745
Plaintiff:
Metal Chem, Inc.
Defendant:
PBTT INC.
Respondent:
Pace Industries, Inc.
NEWSOME-PACE v. USA
as 1:2023cv00226
Plaintiff:
CHEREE NEWSOME-PACE
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1491 Tucker 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.
