Cases 41 - 50 of 121
Davis v. Lubeck et al
as 2:2013cv00933
Plaintiff:
Dexter Paris Davis
Defendant:
Bruce Lubeck, Matthew J. Hansen, Matthew A. Barraza and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ehat v. Lilfewatch et al
as 2:2013cv00919
Plaintiff:
Stephen Kent Ehat
Defendant:
Lilfewatch and Evan Sirlin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Klein v. Haslam et al
as 2:2013cv00580
Plaintiff:
R. Wayne Klein
Defendant:
Kent Haslam and Kent & Michelle Haslam Trust, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0754 Receiver of Property in Different Districts
Mountain Dudes v. Split Rock Holdings et al
as 2:2013cv00510
Plaintiff:
Mountain Dudes
Defendant:
Split Rock Holdings, Split Rock Holdings LLC, Old SPI and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Davis v. Garrity et al
as 2:2013cv00349
Plaintiff:
Bryan B. Davis
Defendant:
Aaron Garrity, Gary Hollister, Gordon Morton and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Burckhard v. Stevens-Henager College et al
as 2:2013cv00244
Plaintiff:
Heather Burckhard
Defendant:
Stevens-Henager College, California College San Diego, Independence University and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv00231
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Federal Trade Commission v. Ideal Financial Solutions et al
as 2:2013mc00101
Plaintiff:
Federal Trade Commission
Defendant:
Ideal Financial Solutions, Ascot Crossing, Chandon Group and others
Receiver:
Thomas W. McNamara
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0754 Receiver of Property in Different Districts
Clark v. Astrue
as 2:2012cv00912
Plaintiff:
Kent L. Clark
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv00190
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0702
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.
