Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Quest Arcadian LLC et al v. Glover
as 8:2026cv03659
Plaintiff:
Quest Arcadian LLC and Arcadian Maryland Owner, LLC/The Arcadian
Defendant:
Joy Glover
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv11365
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Glover v. USA
as 5:2026cv00201
Petitioner:
Jahmean Aquil Glover
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Doe I et al v. Glover et al
as 3:2026cv08222
Plaintiff:
John Doe I, John Doe II, John Doe III and others
Defendant:
Jeffrey Glover, David Rhodes, Dan Butler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GLOVER v. ALABASTER MORTGAGE COMPANY et al
as 4:2026cv00455
Plaintiff:
RONALD LEE GLOVER
Defendant:
ALABASTER MORTGAGE COMPANY and LEON COUNTY CLERK OF COURT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Abreu v. Glover et al
as 3:2026cv02630
Petitioner:
Jabez Luis Abreu
Respondent:
Brad Glover and Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
United States of America v. Glover
as 26-2521
Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
DAVID C. GLOVER
Ameritrust Mortgage Corporation v. FirstLoans Inc. et al
as 1:2026cv03574
Plaintiff:
Ameritrust Mortgage Corporation
Defendant:
FirstLoans Inc.,, Jason Taylor, Christopher Actie and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Jones v. Young et al
as 2:2026cv00143
Plaintiff:
Christopher Jones
Defendant:
Jeff Awe Young, John Bird, Gibson III and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GLOVER v. WALMART STORES EAST LP
as 1:2026cv00129
Plaintiff:
JAYNA GLOVER
Defendant:
WALMART STORES EAST LP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
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.
