Cases 1 - 7 of 7
United States of America v. Weaver (Linick)
as 17-927
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant:
Mark Benowitz, Howard S. Strauss, Wallace W. DiRenzo, AKA Wally and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Richard Linick, Lawrence A. Kaplan, Paul E. Raia and others
United States of America v. Weaver (Goldberg)
as 17-377
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant:
Mark Benowitz, Richard Linick, Howard S. Strauss and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Lawrence A. Kaplan, Scott M. Doumas, Paul E. Raia and others
United States of America v. Weaver (Raia)
as 17-107
Defendant:
Scott M. Doumas, Mark Benowitz, Richard R. Goldberg and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Paul E. Raia
Defendant - Appellant-Cross-Appellee:
Edward Morris Weaver, AKA Ned and Lawrence A. Kaplan
Appellee-Cross-Appellant:
United States of America
United States of America v. Weaver (Doumas)
as 17-108
Defendant:
Mark Benowitz, Richard R. Goldberg, Richard Linick and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Scott M. Doumas and Paul E. Raia
Defendant - Appellant-Cross-Appellee:
Edward Morris Weaver, AKA Ned and Lawrence A. Kaplan
Appellee-Cross-Appellant:
United States of America
United States of America v. Weaver
as 16-4162
Defendant:
Scott M. Doumas, Mark Benowitz, Richard R. Goldberg and others
Defendant - Appellant-Cross-Appellee:
Edward Morris Weaver, AKA Ned and Lawrence A. Kaplan
Appellee-Cross-Appellant:
United States of America
United States of America v. Weaver (Kaplan)
as 16-3985
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant:
Scott M. Doumas, Mark Benowitz, Richard R. Goldberg and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Lawrence A. Kaplan and Edward Morris Weaver, AKA Ned
United States of America v. Weaver
as 16-3861
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant:
Scott M. Doumas, Mark Benowitz, Richard R. Goldberg and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Edward Morris Weaver, AKA Ned and Lawrence A. Kaplan
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.
