Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Kenneth K. Henderson v. Irvine Unified School District
as 5:2024cv00476
Defendant:
Randy Walker, Janet Walker, Irvine Unified School District and others
Plaintiff:
Kenneth K. Henderson
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
MidFirst Bank v. Upgo, Inc. et al
as 8:2023cv02170
Plaintiff:
MidFirst Bank, a Federally Chartered Savings Association and MidFirst Bank
Defendant:
Upgo, Inc., Retrievo, Inc., Sun Joo Kim and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Marasigan v. MidFirst Bank et al
as 3:2023cv00634
Plaintiff:
Sharisse Aboleda Marasigan
Defendant:
MidFirst Bank and Does 1-10, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601 Truth in Lending
Anibal Silva v. Midland Mortgage et al
as 5:2021cv00832
Defendant:
Midfirst Bank, Midland Mortgage, Ken Clark and others
Plaintiff:
Anibal Silva
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Cyrus Hekmat v. Midfirst Bank
as 2:2020cv08692
Plaintiff:
Cyrus Hekmat
Defendant:
MIDFIRST BANK, THROUGH ITS DIVISION, FIRST CENTURY BANK, Midfirst Bank and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Penaloza v. Midfirst Bank
as 1:2017at00391
Plaintiff:
Angie Penaloza
Defendant:
Midfirst Bank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Penaloza v. Midfirst Bank
as 1:2017cv00669
Plaintiff:
Angie Penaloza
Defendant:
Midfirst Bank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Midfirst Bank v. Joseph Leynard Smith et al
as 2:2015cv09177
Plaintiff:
Midfirst Bank
Defendant:
Joseph Leynard Smith and Yolanda Denise Smith
Midfirst Bank v. Joseph Leynard Smith et al
as 2:2015mc00287
Plaintiff:
Midfirst Bank
Defendant:
Joseph Leynard Smith and Yolanda Denise Smith
City of Santa Monica et al v. Jonathan G Ornstein et al
as 2:2015cv04583
Defendant:
All Other Persons Unknown, County of Los Angeles, Does and others
Plaintiff:
City of Santa Monica, State of California and State of California
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.
