Cases 1 - 10 of 105
Smith v. USA
as 5:2025cv00236
Petitioner:
Allen Martin Smith
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Martin v. Easyknock LLC et al
as 5:2025cv00355
Plaintiff:
Allen Martin
Defendant:
Easyknock LLC and EK Real Estate Fund I LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1640 Truth in Lending
Bohannon, et al. v. Mozaffari Engineering, Inc., et al.
as 25-1073
Plaintiff:
THOMAS BOHANNON, an individual and DEENA BOHANNON, an individual
Defendant:
MOZAFFARI ENGINEERING, INC., a California corporation, ANDRE MOZAFFARI, an individual, MARTIN MCDONALD DEVELOPMENT, INC., a California corporation and others
Martin v. Easyknock LLC et al
as 5:2025cv00055
Defendant:
EK Real Estate Fund I LLC and Easyknock LLC
Plaintiff:
Allen Martin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Bohannon, et al. v. Martin McDonald Development, Inc., et al.
as 24-6886
Defendant:
MARTIN MCDONALD DEVELOPMENT, INC., a California corporation, RON MANN, DOWDY CONSTRUCTION INC., a California Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
DEENA BOHANNON, an individual and THOMAS BOHANNON, an individual
SIMERSON v. SIMMONS et al
as 1:2024cv00917
Defendant:
AD PORTER, R. RAMSEY, WA HOWELL and others
Plaintiff:
TERRY SIMERSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Simerson v. Simmons et al
as 3:2024cv00908
Defendant:
WA Howell, TD Smith, JK Parks and others
Plaintiff:
Terry Simerson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MAAT EL v. USA
as 1:2024cv01563
Plaintiff:
AUSAR MAAT EL and CARLTON ALLEN MARTIN
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1491 Tucker Act
MARTIN v. DOE et al
as 2:2024cv00455
Defendant:
RICHARD ROE and JOHN DOE
Plaintiff:
TROY ALLEN MARTIN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Doe v. Martin
as 4:2024cv00430
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
Jerry Allen Martin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
