Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Butler v. Woods et al
as 4:2023cv00942
Plaintiff:
Trustee Jack Butler
Defendant:
Attorney Patrick K. Woods, Attorney Brandon Lane, Judge Andrew Bench and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Endres v. Moody et al
as 1:2023cv12051
Plaintiff:
Steven P. Endres and Pro se litigant Steven P. Endres
Defendant:
Ashley Moody, Ken Paxton, City and County of San Francisco, California and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Shavonda Smith v. Paxton Media Group, LLC, et al
as 22-2342
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Shavonda Smith
Defendant / Appellee:
Paxton Media Group, LLC and David M. Paxton, President and CEO, Individually and in his official capacity
WILLIAMS et al v. GARLAND et al
as 1:2022cv01268
Plaintiff:
JOHN B. WILLIAMS, III and BERNARD ENTERISES AND ENTERTAINMENT, B.E.E. LLC
Defendant:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, HENRY CUELLAR, JOHN CORNYN and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 241 Conspiracy Against Citizen Rights
Smith v. Paxton Media Group LLC et al
as 3:2021cv00015
Defendant:
David M Paxton and Paxton Media Group LLC
Plaintiff:
Shavonda Smith
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964
Robert D. Brenizer et al v. FCA US LLC et al
as 3:2019cv03057
Plaintiff:
Sape Llanos, Wilford Vernon David, Tex Cody Horn and others
Defendant:
Does 1 through 10, inclusive and FCA U.S., LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Pompura v. Visa, Inc. et al
as 1:2016cv00518
Plaintiff:
Shane M Pompura
Defendant:
Visa, Inc., Metabank, Meta Bank Financial Group and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
Pompura v. Paxton
as 1:2016cv01099
Defendant:
Warren K. Paxton
Plaintiff:
Shane M. Pompura
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Stringer v. Peters et al
as 4:2011cv01085
Plaintiff:
Charles L Stringer
Defendant:
Ed Peters, Bobby Delaughter, Charles Knauss and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
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.
