Cases 1 - 10 of 78
Strange v. U S Autocare
as 1:2024cv00260
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
U S Autocare and Global Bridge Communications
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227
STRANGE v. BELLOWS
as 1:2024cv00033
Plaintiff:
CLINTON STRANGE
Defendant:
SHENNA BELLOWS
Not Yet Classified:
MAINE ATTORNEY GENERAL - HABEAS CASES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Strange v. Gateway Voip Provider et al
as 2:2023cv00622
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Gateway Voip Provider and Does Nos. 1-5
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv21266
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Strange v. Direct Funding Now L L C et al
as 5:2023cv00425
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Direct Funding Now L L C, I P Horizon L L C and Does 1-5
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227 Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Strange v. Wholesale Payments Direct Inc
as 2:2023cv00022
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Wholesale Payments Direct Inc
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00352
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Strange v. Hudson Legacy Holdings LLC et al
as 5:2023cv00082
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Hudson Legacy Holdings L L C and Kendrick Michael Hudson
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227 Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Strange v. Daisy
as 5:2023cv00101
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Daisy
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Strange v. Krause & Kinsman, DC LLP
as 5:2022cv00400
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Krause & Kinsman, DC LLP
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
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.
