Cases 31 - 40 of 54
TATE v. LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA
as 1:2013cv01947
Defendant:
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA
Plaintiff:
GEORGIA C TATE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
MCCARTY v. LVNV FUNDING, LLC et al
as 1:2013cv01649
Defendant:
LVNV FUNDING, LLC, STENGER & STENGER, P.C. and TATE & KIRLIN ASSOCIATES, INC.
Plaintiff:
TOMMY MCCARTY
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv01418
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv00204
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
TATE v. BUTTS
as 1:2013cv00969
Respondent:
KEITH BUTTS
Petitioner:
DANNY ODELL TATE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ALEXANDER et al v. SVC MANUFACTURING, INC. et al
as 1:2012cv01636
Plaintiff:
SHA'RON ALEXANDER, ROBERT BENTLEY, MICAH BRADLEY and others
Defendant:
PEPSICO, STOKELY VAN-CAMP, INC. and SVC MANUFACTURING, INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185 Labor/Mgt. Relations (Contracts)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2012cv00110
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
In Re:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BA
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv01188
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
TATE v. ZENK
as 1:2012cv01044
Petitioner:
DANNY ODELL TATE
Respondent:
MR. ZENK
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tate v. Superintendent
as 3:2012cv00269
Petitioner:
Danny Tate
Respondent:
Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
