Cases 11 - 20 of 53
State of Michigan Sixth Judicial Circuit Court et al v. El Davis
as 2:2018cv12936
Plaintiff:
Michigan, State of, Quicken Loans, Inc., Trott Law, P.C. and others
Defendant:
Noble Marcus El Davis
Cardenas v. Quicken Loans, Inc.
as 4:2018cv02827
Defendant:
Quicken Loans, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Antonio Cardenas
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227
Mattson v. Quicken Loans, Inc.
as 3:2018cv00989
Plaintiff:
Erik Mattson
Defendant:
Quicken Loans, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
HouseCanary, Inc. v. Quicken Loans, Inc. et al
as 5:2018cv00519
Plaintiff:
HouseCanary, Inc.
Defendant:
Quicken Loans, Inc., In-House Realty, LLC and One Reverse Mortgage, LLC
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1836 (b) Civil Action to Protect Trade Secrets
FILING ERROR
as 5:2018cv00515
Plaintiff:
HouseCanary, Inc.
Defendant:
Quicken Loans Inc., In-House Realty, LLC and One Reverse Mortgage, LLC
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1836 (b) Civil Action to Protect Trade Secrets
HouseCanary, Inc. v. Quicken Loans Inc. et al
as 3:2018cv01672
Plaintiff:
HouseCanary, Inc.
Defendant:
Quicken Loans Inc., In-House Realty, LLC and One Reverse Mortgage, LLC
HouseCanary, Inc. v. Quicken Loans Inc. et al
as 4:2018cv01672
Plaintiff:
HouseCanary, Inc.
Defendant:
Quicken Loans Inc. , One Reverse Mortgage, LLC and In-House Realty, LLC
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1836
Pagano et al v. Quicken Loans Inc.
as 3:2018cv00117
Plaintiff:
Jeanne Pagano and Dana Norris
Defendant:
Quicken Loans Inc.
Cause Of Action: Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
Mattson v. Quicken Loans, Inc. et al
as 3:2017cv01840
Plaintiff:
Erik Mattson
Defendant:
New Penn Financial, LLC, Quicken Loans, Inc., United Mortgage Corp. and others
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
Bell v. Quicken Loans, Inc.
as 0:2017cv60909
Petitioner:
Sylvania Bell
Defendant:
Quicken Loans, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
