Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Grant v. PETER WOLF & ASSOCIATES PC et al
as 9:2022cv04262
Plaintiff:
Terry Lennette Grant
Defendant:
PETER WOLF & ASSOCIATES PC, Peter Wolf, Esq, WOLF & MOGIL LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Dooly v. Sears et al
as 7:2022cv01734
Plaintiff:
Geary Thomas Dooly
Defendant:
Nicholas Niles Sears, Jr., William Stork, Johnson and Freedman, LLC and others
Sykes (Price) v. Marshall et al
as 3:2022cv00211
Plaintiff:
Jennifer L. Sykes (Price)
Defendant:
Kimberly Marshall, Carmen Rovera, David Storke and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question-Violation of Due Process
Gardner v. Stork et al
as 9:2021cv00720
Defendant:
Brock and Scott PLLC, William P Stork and PHH Mortgage Services (New Rez)
Plaintiff:
Louise Legare Gardner
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
STORK et al v. DT GROUP DEVELOPMENT, INC. et al
as 1:2013cv00539
Plaintiff:
ROGER STORK , MICHAEL KEENAN , SUSAN KEENAN and others
Defendant:
DT GROUP DEVELOPMENT, INC., DT SECURITIES, LTD., THOMAS GALLOP and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2010cv00670
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Binns v. Binns et al
as 2:2010cv00428
Plaintiff:
Robert S. Binns
Defendant:
Brianna Binns, Tracy Lee Stork and Bonnie Lee Faucher
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
SympathyFood.com, LLC et al v. Burban
as 3:2010cv00365
Plaintiff:
SympathyFood.com, LLC and David W. Storke
Defendant:
Nancy Burban
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Stork v. Metts et al
as 3:2009cv02153
Plaintiff:
James R Stork, Jr
Defendant:
James Metts and Miles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Watkins v. Stork et al
as 2:2009cv00405
Plaintiff:
Danny B. Watkins
Defendant:
Hail Stork, TPS Jones, TPS Jones 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.
