Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Independent Service Provider, LLC v. Kelley
as FLM/8:21-CV-00748
Defendant:
Kelley and David Kelley
Plaintiff:
Independent Service Provider, LLC
Independent Service Provider, LLC v. Kelley
as 8:2021cv00748
Defendant:
David Kelley
Plaintiff:
Independent Service Provider, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2018cv02440
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
USA v. Lord Kelly
as 17-50306
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
LORD DAVID KELLY, AKA D, AKA Daveyboy, AKA Lord David Kelley, AKA Lord David Kelly, Sr., AKA Rave, AKA Lil' Rave, AKA Lil Ray
STURZENACKER v. CMC RESTORATION, INC. et al
as 5:2017cv00113
Plaintiff:
GLORIA STURZENACKER
Defendant:
CMC RESTORATION, INC., CHRISTOPHER & BRUMMETT, INC. and DAVID KELLEY
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
David Bryant v. United State
as 16-2385
Petitioner:
David Kelley Bryant
Respondent:
United States of America
St. Louis Metropolitan Taxicab Commission v. Uber, Inc. et al
as 4:2015cv01562
Plaintiff:
St. Louis Metropolitan Taxicab Commission
Defendant:
Uber, Inc. , Uber Technologies, Inc. , John and Jane Does and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
KELLEY et al v. NITELINES USA INC
as 4:2014mc00028
Plaintiff:
DAVID KELLEY , PHYLLIS COVINGTON , DWAYNE HINES and others
Defendant:
NITELINES USA INC
Garnishee:
Tallahassee State Bank
Kelley et al v. US Assets Recovery, LLC et al
as 6:2010cv03332
Plaintiff:
David Kelley and PGM Technologies, Inc.
Defendant:
US Assets Recovery, LLC, Brian Jordan and Roger Hines
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1030
Theofel et al v. Farey-Jones et al
as 3:2001cv04166
Plaintiff:
George Theofel, George Theofel, George Theofel and others
Defendant:
Alwyn Farey-Jones, Alwyn Farey-Jones, Alwyn Farey-Jones and others
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.
