Cases 81 - 90 of 114
MELO et al v. AMS SERVICING, LLC et al
as 2:2013cv01807
Plaintiff:
DENNIS F. MELO , MONIQUE ALBORNOZ , REGINA AMANKULOR and others
Defendant:
AMS SERVICING, LLC , BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. , BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
SINGLETON et al v. FIRST STUDENT MANAGEMENT LLC et al
as 1:2013cv01744
Plaintiff:
THERESA SINGLETON , FRANK W. KOEHLER , DARLENE KENNEDY and others
Defendant:
FIRST STUDENT MANAGEMENT LLC, FIRST STUDENT INC. and JOHN-DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
REEVES v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
as 1:2013cv01795
Petitioner:
ARNOLD REEVES
Respondent:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
REEVES v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2012cv06320
Plaintiff:
ARNOLD REEVES
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and BUREAU OF PRISONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BURRIS et al v. MILLVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 1:2012cv04678
Plaintiff:
DELITA SHERMANE BURRIS
Defendant:
MILLVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT , CITY OF MILLVILLE , JOHN BUTSCHKY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
REEVES v. ZICKEFOOSE
as 1:2012cv00038
Petitioner:
ARNOLD REEVES
Respondent:
DONNA ZICKEFOOSE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv06889
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
REEVES v. HOLMES
as 3:2011cv05700
Plaintiff:
TROY REEVES
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER HOLMES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
REEVES v. HOLMES
as 3:2011cv05717
Petitioner:
TROY REEVES
Respondent:
CHRISTOPHER HOLMES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
REEVES v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 3:2011cv04385
Petitioner:
TROY REEVES
Respondent:
STATE OF NEW JERSEY and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
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.
