Cases 1 - 10 of 10
ANDERSON v. ZFC LEGAL TITLE TRUST I, U.S BANK NATIONAL et al
as 1:2016cv01499
Plaintiff:
CRAIG D ANDERSON
Defendant:
ZFC LEGAL TITLE TRUST I, U.S BANK NATIONAL, ZAIS FINANCIAL CORP, FAY SERVICING LCC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MOUA v. KERESTES et al
as 5:2015cv00591
Petitioner:
LEE CHONG MOUA
Respondent:
JOHN KERESTES and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
MOUA v. GLUNT et al
as 2:2013cv07150
Petitioner:
DAVID MOUA
Respondent:
STEVE L. GLUNT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MOUA v. GLUNT
as 2:2013cv04009
Petitioner:
DAVID MOUA
Respondent:
STEVE L. GLUNT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
David Moua v. Randall Britten, et al
as 10-2295
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID MOUA
Defendant - Appellee:
RANDALL BRITTEN, DA DELAWARE and ATTY GEN PA
Lee Moua v. Daniel Taylor, et al
as 09-3144
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LEE CHONG MOUA
Defendant - Appellee:
MICHAEL J. PEREZOUS, in his individual and official capacity, LOUIS J. FARINA, in his individual and official capacity, JOSEPH DIGUGLIEMO and others
MOUA v. BRITTEN et al
as 2:2009cv00762
Petitioner:
DAVID MOUA
Respondent:
RANDALL BRITTEN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MICHELLE HUTTON, ESQ. and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF TOM CORBET, ESQ.
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Lee Moua v. Taylor
as 08-3279
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LEE CHONG MOUA
Defendant - Appellee:
JOSEPH DIGUGLIEMO, in his individual and official capacity, LOUIS J. FARINA, in his individual and official capacity, MICHAEL J. PEREZOUS, in his individual and official capacity and others
MOUA v. TAYLOR et al
as 5:2008cv00231
Plaintiff:
LEE CHONG MOUA
Defendant:
DANIEL K. TAYLOR, MICHAEL J. PEREZOUS, ., LOUIS J. FARINA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
