Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Duffy et al v. Macalinao et al
as 2:2024cv00209
Plaintiff:
Ian Duffy, Samuel Lee and Douglas Boyle
Defendant:
Ian Macalinao and Dylan Macalinao
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
United States of America v. $10,920.00 in United States Currency et al
as 1:2021cv00560
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
$10,920.00 in United States Currency and $47,332.00 in United States Currency
Claimant:
Tameka Lashunda Hollingsworth and Christopher Duffy
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2019cv00826
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2019cv00141
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
GALLAGHER v. JHD HEALTHCARE PARTNERS, LLC et al
as 4:2016cv00689
Plaintiff:
CLIFFORD F. GALLAGHER
Defendant:
JHD HEALTHCARE PARTNERS, LLC, JHD GROUP, INC. and JOHN H. DUFFY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 704
Coignard et al v. The City of Longview et al
as 2:2015cv01229
Defendant:
The City of Longview, Gene Duffie, Glenn Derr and others
Plaintiff:
Kristiana Joy Coignard, Elizabeth Coignard and Erik Coignard
Petitioner:
Patrice Savage
Not Classified By Court:
Michael Phillip Patterson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00037
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Duffy v. USA
as 4:2013cv00489
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Charles Vernon Duffy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Duffy v. Behrns et al
as 1:2012cv00036
Plaintiff:
Danny Lee Duffy, Sr
Defendant:
Robert L Behrns and Brad Livingston
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Duffy v. Outlaw
as 1:2007cv00124
Petitioner:
Emerson Duffy
Respondent:
T C Outlaw
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
