Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Heinz v. Customer Contact Solutions, LLC
as 1:2024cv11001
Plaintiff:
Austin Heinz
Defendant:
Customer Contact Solutions, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
SEAFREEZE SHORESIDE, INC. et al v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR et al
as 1:2022cv11091
Plaintiff:
SEAFREEZE SHORESIDE, INC., LONG ISLAND COMMERCIAL FISHING ASSOC., INC., XIII NORTHEAST FISHERY SECTOR, INC. and others
Defendant:
United States Department of the Interior, DEB HAALAND, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and others
Intervenor Defendant:
Vineyard Wind 1 LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment
Fantastic Sams Franchise Corporation v. LarkSimple, LLC et al
as 1:2022cv10863
Petitioner:
Fantastic Sams Franchise Corporation
Respondent:
LarkSimple, LLC and Warren E. Austin
Cause Of Action: 9 U.S.C. § 9 Motion to Confirm Arbitration Loan
Vapor Technology Association et al v. Baker et al
as 1:2019cv12048
Plaintiff:
Adam Webster, Rising Sun Vapors LLC, Vapor Technology Association and others
Defendant:
Governor Charlie Baker and Commissioner of DPH Monica Bharel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv10699
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
AUTOMILE HOLDINGS, LLC et al v. Hickey et al
as 1:2018cv10464
Plaintiff:
AUTOMILE HOLDINGS, LLC , AMR AUTO-HOLDINGS - PA, LLC , AMR AUTO-HOLDINGS - AC, LLC and others
Defendant:
Patrick Hickey , MELISSA REAVILL , JENNIFER VOLO and others
Cause Of Action: 09 U.S.C. § 0010
Baughman v. Psychemedics Corporation et al
as 1:2017cv10191
Plaintiff:
Austin Baughman
Defendant:
Psychemedics Corporation , Raymond C. Kubacki and Neil Lerner
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
In Re Attorney Disciplinary Proceedings
as 1:2015mc91367
Movant:
Robert M. Farrell
Respondent:
Austin S. O'Toole
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.
