Cases 91 - 100 of 181
Jarjis v. Federal National Mortgage Association et al
as 2:2013cv13021
Plaintiff:
Isaam Jarjis
Defendant:
Federal National Mortgage Association and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Intervenor:
Federal Housing Finance Agency
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Amera Mortgage Corporation
as 2:2013cv12056
Plaintiff:
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Defendant:
Amera Mortgage Corporation
Goldberg v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
as 2:2013cv11622
Plaintiff:
Lynn Goldberg
Defendant:
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Hedler v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al
as 2:2013cv11374
Plaintiff:
William D Hedler
Defendant:
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. , Unknown Trustee, as Trustee of the asset-backed security in which the loan at issue was pooled and UNKNOWN HOLDERS, the unknown holders of said asset-backed security
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv11199
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Jarman v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. et al
as 4:2013cv11055
Plaintiff:
Christopher Jarman
Defendant:
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Pratt v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
as 2:2013cv10796
Plaintiff:
James D Pratt
Defendant:
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Dyer et al v. US Bank National Association et al
as 1:2013cv00197
Plaintiff:
Joseph L. Dyer and Brenda M. Dyer
Defendant:
US Bank National Association , JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. , Chase Home Finance, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Clark et al
as 1:2013cv00175
Plaintiff:
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Defendant:
Jacque L. Clark and Scott C. Clark
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Donahue et al v. Federal National Mortgage Association et al
as 2:2013cv10205
Defendant:
Federal National Mortgage Association and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Plaintiff:
James Donahue and Sandra Leighton- Donahue
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.
