Cases 171 - 180 of 639
PIERSON v. UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE et al
as 2:2016cv08499
Defendant:
UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE , LAUFER, DALENA, CADICINA, JENNSEN & BOYD and JOHN JAMES PIERSON
Plaintiff:
NANNETTE PIERSON
Counter_claimant:
LAUFER, DALENA, CADICINA, JENNSEN & BOYD and JOHN JAMES PIERSON
Counter_defendant:
NANNETTE PIERSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2410
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ERLING
as 2:2016cv06681
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
STUART ERLING
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. RICHARD A. MOORE, DMD PA et al
as 2:2016cv06054
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
RICHARD A. MOORE, DMD PA, RICHARD A MOORE and GENNA K MOORE
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. PARENT
as 3:2016cv05550
Petitioner:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Respondent:
PHILIP A. PARENT
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DUBOSE
as 2:2016cv04755
Petitioner:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Respondent:
ANTHONY DUBOSE
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
DALEY v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2016cv04452
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL W DALEY, JR
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7422
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BURGESS
as 2:2016cv04011
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
JEANINE BURGESS
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MERCEDA
as 2:2016cv03123
Petitioner:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Respondent:
ROBERSON MERCEDA
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SANCHEZ et al
as 1:2016cv03024
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
HECTOR DANIEL SANCHEZ, TARA GEISEL and INFINITE MORTGAGE SERVICES, LLC.
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7403
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BITTON
as 2:2016cv02628
Petitioner:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Respondent:
MICHEL BITTON
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
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.
