Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 18-55841
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 18-55841
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
In re: Salma Agha-Khan, et al v. Bank of America, et al
as 17-17262
Debtor:
In the Matter of: SALMA AGHA-KHAN, M.D.
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SALMA AGHA-KHAN, M.D.
Defendant - Appellee:
BANK OF AMERICA, BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP, CITIMORTGAGE INC. and others
In re: Salma Agha-Khan v. Bank of America, et al
as 17-71883
:
In re: SALMA AGHA-KHAN, M.D.
Petitioner:
SALMA AGHA-KHAN, M.D.
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO
Real Party In Interest:
BRETT P. RYAN, JONATHAN J. DAMEN, MCCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2016cv00122
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00424
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2015cv00079
Intervenor Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Terry Worley v. Pite Duncan, LLP, et al
as 14-35241
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TERRY WORLEY
Defendant - Appellee:
PITE DUNCAN, LLP and PNC BANK, NA, DBA PNC Mortgage
Worley v. Pite Duncan, LLP et al
as 6:2013cv02104
Defendant:
PNC Bank, NA and Pite Duncan, LLP
Plaintiff:
Terry Worley
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Von Brincken v. GMAC Mortgage et al
as 2:2012cv01689
Plaintiff:
Shelley Von Brincken
Defendant:
GMAC Mortgage, Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc., Federal National Mortgage Association and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
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.
