Cases 31 - 40 of 972
Friedrich Lu v. Jane Young, et al
as 23-2496
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FRIEDRICH LU
Defendant / Appellee:
JANE E. YOUNG, JOE H. TUCKER, JR., LESLIE M. GREENSPAN and others
Defendant:
WALTER T. MITCHELL, JAHAD HASAN, ERIC T. DONOVAN and others
Handy v. USA
as 6:2023cv00995
Petitioner:
Mark L Handy
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Gallia Ins. Agency, Inc. et al v. Talarico, III
as 3:2023cv01222
Plaintiff:
Gallia Ins. Agency, Inc. and Mr. Mark L. Gallia
Defendant:
Earl Talarico, III d/b/a TALARICO INS. AGENCY
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1121 Trademark Infringement
Gold v. US Bancorp et al
as 3:2023cv01342
Plaintiff:
Michelle Gold, The Gold Family Trust, Star Martinez and others
Defendant:
J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, RBS Acceptance Inc., RBS Financial Prodcuts Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Civil Remedies: Racketeering (RICO) Act
Friedrich Lu v. Jane Young, et al
as 23-1845
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FRIEDRICH LU
Defendant:
JANE E. YOUNG, BISOLA OJIKUTU, TIMOTHY J. HARRINGTON and others
Defendant / Appellee:
JOE H. TUCKER, JR., LESLIE M. GREENSPAN, TUCKER LAW GROUP LLC and others
BUNCE v. VISUAL TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS, INC. et al
as 2:2023cv01740
Plaintiff:
MARK L. BUNCE
Defendant:
VISUAL TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS, INC. and MATHU G. RAJAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
BARNES v. USA
as 1:2023cv00455
Plaintiff:
MARK L. BARNES
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1491 Tucker Act
LU v. YOUNG et al
as 2:2023cv01239
Plaintiff:
FRIEDRICH LU
Defendant:
JANE E. YOUNG, JOE H. TUCKER, JR, LESLIE MILLER GREENSPAN and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Neamo v. Clarke et al
as 7:2023cv00109
Plaintiff:
Mark L. Neamo
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, David Anderson and Tim Hamm
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
