Cases 11 - 20 of 94
SMITH v. SYNERGY LAW, LLC et al
as 1:2019cv00349
Defendant:
SYNERGY LAW, LLC, MONICA CHAPMAN, SCOTT MARINELLI and others
Plaintiff:
DIANE LORRAINE SMITH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
CHAPMAN v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 1:2018cv02831
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC., PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS COUNCIL, JOHNSON & JOHNSON and others
Plaintiff:
MARGUERITE CHAPMAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CADOCHE v. HOLFORD
as 1:2018cv01698
Plaintiff:
GALIQUOGI' DINAH DEAS CADOCHE and BRIDGETTE CHAPMAN
Defendant:
ROBERT GEORGE HOLFORD, JR.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CADOCHE v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON et al
as 1:2018cv01699
Defendant:
THOMAS A. ADAMS, BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, NORMAN ST. GEORGE and others
Plaintiff:
GALIQUOGI' DINAH DEAS CADOCHE and BRIDGETTE CHAPMAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv01558
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION et al v. CHAPMAN
as 1:2017cv02863
Plaintiff:
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, GINNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC and others
Defendant:
LAMAR CHRISTOPHER CHAPMAN, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CHAPMAN v. MEHTA et al
as 1:2017cv02812
Plaintiff:
LAMAR CHRISTOPHER CHAPMAN, III
Defendant:
AMIT PRIYAVADAN MEHTA, BARRY SOETORO, UNITED STATES SENATE, JUDICIARY COMMITTEE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
TUCKER v. PARKER et al
as 1:2017cv02706
Plaintiff:
KEVIN L. TUCKER
Defendant:
CARL D. PARKER, AEAONMS, INC., CHARLES DAVENPORT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CHAPMAN et al v. U.S. BANK et al
as 1:2017cv02636
Plaintiff:
BERT E. CHAPMAN and LAMAR C. CHAPMAN
Defendant:
U.S. BANK, GINNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CHAPMAN v. HEATH et al
as 1:2017cv01735
Plaintiff:
LAMAR CHRISTOPHER CHAPMAN, III
Defendant:
L.R. HEATH, BARRY SIERRO, E. BRADLEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
