Cases 1 - 10 of 105
Joseph Felton v. Manish S. Shah
as 24-1218
Petitioner:
JOSEPH A. FELTON
Respondent:
MANISH S. SHAH
Interested Party:
MICHAEL R. PAXSON, MICHAEL SHRAKE, ANGELINA SMITH and others
United States v. Shauwn Nettles
as 23-3176
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Shauwn Nettles
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv00762
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Esmond et al v. Bridgeview Finance LLC et al
as 3:2023cv05664
Plaintiff:
Bryan Esmond, Ronald Moran and Joseph Nettles
Defendant:
Bridgeview Finance LLC and Sarah Reardon
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
United States of America v. Jackson
as 23-6281
Defendant:
AMAR SCOTT, YULANDER GREEN, JERRICK DENSON and others
Defendant / Appellant:
MICHAEL JACKSON, Boosum and Boots
Not Yet Classified:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
United States of America v. Amar Scott (Smith)
as 22-3104
Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant:
Amar Scott, AKA "A", John Simmons, Jerrick Denson, AKA "D" and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Dearick Smith, AKA "Ace", AKA "Lil D"
Georgia Department of Community Supervision, et al v. Brandon Cobb, et al
as 22-90017
Petitioner:
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SUPERVISION and COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
Respondent:
BRANDON COBB, MARY HILL and JOSEPH NETTLES
USA v. Keith Nettles
as 22-1838
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
KEITH LAMONT NETTLES
Gibbs v. Bank of America Bank, N.A.
as 22-1344
Plaintiff:
United States of America, ex rel., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Investors, 100 Drug Raped Women and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Eugene M. Gibbs
Defendant / Appellee:
Bank of America Bank, N.A., Nationstar, DBA Mr. Cooper, United States: Freddie Mac and others
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.
