Cases 1 - 10 of 55
Alford v. J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc., et al.
as 4:2023cv00813
Plaintiff:
John R. Alford
Defendant:
J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. and John Does 1 - 10
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Tatum v. Dollar Connect, LLC et al
as 6:2022cv00228
Plaintiff:
Justin Tatum
Defendant:
Dollar Connect, LLC, Lead Flash, LLC, Regency Marketing, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Lee Compton v. John Does 1-10
as 4:2022cv00331
Plaintiff:
Lee Compton
Defendant:
John Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00049
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2022cv00092
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Lancaster et al v. Murray et al
as 4:2021cv00724
Plaintiff:
Kenneth A. Lancaster and Carol D. Lancaster
Defendant:
Nathan A. Murray, Stayko Dimitrov Staykov, Bradley Ward Edmondson and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
Speedway Loans, Inc. v. Hassan et al
as 4:2021cv00575
Plaintiff:
Speedway Loans, Inc.
Defendant:
Moataz Ibraham Hassan, Manal El-Ghorab, Jacob Andrew Hernandez and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2021cv00304
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Alexander v. Enhanced Recovery Company, LLC et al
as 4:2021cv00236
Defendant:
John Does 1-25 and Enhanced Recovery Company, LLC
Plaintiff:
Summer Alexander
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Doe v. FedEx Ground Package System Inc et al
as 4:2020cv00978
Defendant:
C. A., FedEx Ground Package System Inc and V. H.
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964
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.
