Cases 1 - 9 of 9
KURZ v. USA
as 1:2022cv01084
Petitioner:
DAVID KURZ
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
USA v. David Kurz
as 20-2693
Defendant / Appellant:
DAVID KURZ
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
JUN v. FORT LEE POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2013cv02803
Plaintiff:
KEVIN JUN
Defendant:
FORT LEE POLICE DEPARTMENT , BOROUGH OF FORT LEE , THOMAS O. RIPOLI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
EISENBERG et al v. FORT LEE POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2013cv01011
Plaintiff:
LIAM EISENBERG , MARTIN EISENBERG and NANCY DOUGHERTY
Defendant:
FORT LEE POLICE DEPARTMENT, BOROUGH OF FORT LEE, CHIEF OF POLICE THOMAS O. RIPOLI and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
KIM v. FORT LEE POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2012cv07693
Plaintiff:
ADAM KIM
Defendant:
FORT LEE POLICE DEPARTMENT, BOROUGH OF FORT LEE, THOMAS O. RIPOLI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Kurz v. Woodall et al
as 2:2011cv00423
Plaintiff:
David Kurz
Defendant:
James H. Woodall, United Title, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
David Kurz, et al v. Fidelity Management and Resear, et al
as 08-2733
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID KURZ, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated and RAYMOND HEINZL, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated
Defendant - Appellee:
FIDELITY MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH COMPANY and FMR CORPORATION
Kurz et al v. Fidelity Management & Research Company et al
as 3:2007cv00709
Plaintiff:
David Kurz and Raymond Heinzl
Defendant:
Fidelity Management & Research Company and FMR Co., Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
Kurz v. Fidelity Management & Research Company et al
as 3:2007cv00592
Plaintiff:
David Kurz
Defendant:
Fidelity Management & Research Company and FMR Co., Inc.
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.
