Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv00159
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv00576
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 b3 Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00184
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227
FRANCIS et al v. PENCE et al
as 1:2017cv00385
Defendant:
CHRISTINA BRUNO, EMC MORTGAGE LLC, RANDY EYSTER and others
Plaintiff:
CARMEN J. FRANCIS and MICHAEL FRANCIS
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
TRUSLEY v. J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., EMC et al
as 1:2017cv00108
Defendant:
J.P MORGAN SECURITIES and J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., EMC
Plaintiff:
JAMIE TRUSLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
DOTSON v. J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK et al
as 1:2016cv02454
Plaintiff:
DERRICK G. DOTSON
Defendant:
ANTONIO HARRIS and J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Rico et al v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC et al
as 2:2015cv00089
Plaintiff:
Pedro F. Rico and Elisa F. Rico
Defendant:
Green Tree Servicing, LLC , J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. , Bank of New York Mellon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv01054
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
SUSKOVICH v. J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. et al
as 1:2010mc00089
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. FEIWELL, MURRAY J. FEIWELL, FEIWELL & HANNOY, P.C./DEBT COLLECTOR and others
Plaintiff:
KATHY JO SUSKOVICH
MYERS v. ECKARD et al
as 1:2008cv01003
Plaintiff:
RONALD L. MYERS
Defendant:
JOHN ECKARD, DOUGLAS KLITZKE, FRANK ANDERSON and others
Cause Of Action: Federal 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.
