Cases 11 - 20 of 31
ST ENGINEERING MARINE LTD v. THOMPSON, MACCOLL & BASS LLC
as 2:2020cv00327
Defendant:
THOMPSON, MACCOLL & BASS LLC
Plaintiff:
ST ENGINEERING MARINE LTD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty
NORTON et al v. UNIVERSITY OF MAINE-ORONO PHYSICS DEPARTMENT et al
as 1:2020cv00030
Defendant:
JOHN THOMPSON, UNIVERSITY OF MAINE-ORONO PHYSICS DEPARTMENT, OFFICER CURTIS and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL A NORTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
THOMPSON v. USA
as 2:2018cv00132
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
TREZJUAN THOMPSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
JOHNSON et al v. CITY OF BIDDEFORD et al
as 2:2017cv00264
Plaintiff:
SUSAN JOHNSON and DERRICK THOMPSON
Defendant:
CITY OF BIDDEFORD, BIDDEFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT, MAINE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv00614
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
THOMPSON v. ALAM et al
as 2:2015cv00069
Plaintiff:
DESIREE THOMPSON
Defendant:
MOHAMMED ALAM and HI BOMBAY INC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. AMERICAN PENSION SERVICES INC et al
as 2:2014mc00101
Plaintiff:
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Defendant:
AMERICAN PENSION SERVICES INC and CURTIS L DEYOUNG
Receiver:
DIANE THOMPSON
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv00427
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
HAYES v. TWO BRIDGES REGIONAL JAIL et al
as 2:2013cv00288
Plaintiff:
AMANDA HAYES
Defendant:
TWO BRIDGES REGIONAL JAIL , COL MARK WESTRUM , LT RICHARD THOMPSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv00141
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
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.
