Cases 71 - 80 of 275
COHEN et al v. AMICA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
as 2:2013cv01434
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM G. COHEN , DORITH COHEN and UNITED STATES TREASURY
Defendant:
AMICA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MCDANIEL
as 2:2013cv01417
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
DARNETT MCDANIEL
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. HERMAN
as 1:2013cv00261
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
DAVID E. HERMAN
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. PARKER et al
as 1:2013cv00255
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
DAVID M. PARKER and PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401 IRS: Tax Liability
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DOES et al
as 2:2013cv01066
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
JOHN DOES and RSB CITIZENS, N.A.
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7609 IRS: Petition to Quash IRS Summons
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. PROSSER et al
as 1:2013cv00163
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
CHARLES J. PROSSER and BARBARA J. PROSSER
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401 IRS: Tax Liability
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. WESOLOWSKI
as 2:2013cv00772
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
MARGUARITE WESOLOWSKI
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401 IRS: Tax Liability
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EKAS et al
as 2:2013cv00562
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
TERRY J. EKAS, NORTHWEST CONSUMER DISCOUNT COMPANY and COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401 IRS: Tax Liability
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. HERMAN
as 1:2013cv00105
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
DAVID E. HERMAN
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401 IRS: Tax Liability
BARRY v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2013cv00540
Plaintiff:
SHAWN P. BARRY
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7422 IRS: Refund Taxes
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.
