Cases 31 - 40 of 57
Hayden v. Vance, et al. (MAG+)
as 2:2015cv00469
Plaintiff:
Steven Mark Hayden
Defendant:
Robert S. Vance, Jr. , Anne-Marie Adams , J. Scott Vowell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv01143
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Trustee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1334
United States v. Hale
as 14-4150
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
THOMAS FRANCIS HALE
RAY v. MDA CAPITAL, INC. et al
as 2:2014cv04198
Plaintiff:
THOMAS FRANCIS RAY
Defendant:
MDA CAPITAL, INC. and X,Y,Z CORPORATIONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv04092
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
IMO 2014 Attorney Mass Suspension
as 2:2014mc00062
Respondent:
Sara Elizabeth Corbat, Danel Michelle Nickels, Duane Jonathan Snow and others
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Type:
Other Statutes
IN RE: FAILURE TO COMPLY
as 1:2014mc00052
Respondent:
JONATHAN ROBERT ANDERSON, MAX WAYNE APPLE, JILL MICHELLE ARNOLD and others
In Re:
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS, NONPAYMENT OF ATTORNEY REGISTRATION FEES, AND/OR FAILURE TO SUBMIT IOLTA CERTIFICATION
Thomas Stack, Jr. v. Outstanding Marine
as 13-2471
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS FRANCIS STACK, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
OUTSTANDING MARINE, JAMES E. STACK, COLONEL GEORGE JOHNSON, MD/DNR and others
Defendant:
STATE OF MARYLAND and MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, (Police)
Rizzuto v. Colvin
as 2:2013cv06079
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Plaintiff:
Thomas Francis Rizzuto
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
In Re: Feeney
as 13-8022
Respondent:
THOMAS FRANCIS FEENEY
Interested Party:
MA BOARD OF BAR OVERSEERS and MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT
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.
