Case Search California (CA)

This search feature provides access to information.

Instant Court Records Search
Criminal Court Records, Civil Court Records, Traffic Court Records
Federal, State, County & Municipal Sources and Much More!

Plaintiff   versus   Defendant
United States of America$7, 696.00 in United States Currency
[Case # 14-1733], [Filed: March 27, 2014]
[ Drug Related Property Seizures§ ⚖ ]

Petitioner   versus   Respondent
In re: KAMARA MAMADOU
More Information
DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA
[Case # 14-1679], [Filed: March 24, 2014]
[ Other§ ⚖ ]

Plaintiff   versus   Defendant
United States of America$63, 530.00 in United States Currency
[Case # 14-1787], [Filed: April 03, 2014]
[ Drug Related Property Seizures§ ⚖ ]

Plaintiff   versus   Defendant
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA$29, 410.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, more or less
[Case # 14-6101], [Filed: May 07, 2014]
[ Drug Related Seizure of Property§ ⚖ ]

ᐅ more or less
California,   April 11, 2014
Case 2:2014cv02824/587361, some of the participants — ᐅ Robert C. Ammerman, ᐅ Robert Ammerman, ᐅ David Eichler, ᐅ James Calandra, ᐅ Robert C. Ammerman, ᐅ Albert Waxman 

Check it out, it's Industrial Digital Imaging Inc, Gamma Medica-Ideas Inc, Gamma Medica-Ideas (USA) Inc, Robert C. Ammerman, Robert Ammerman, Advanced Molecular Imaging LLC, Advanced Molecular Imaging Inc and The Official Committee of Creditors Holding Unsecured Claims of taking on David Eichler, Capital Resource Partners V LP, James Calandra, Birch Hill Partners LLC, Robert C. Ammerman, Psilos Group Partners III LP, Psilos Group Partners IIIA LP, Psilos Group Partners IIIB LP, Psilos Group Partners IIIC LP, Albert Waxman and Alvin. Case number case 2:2014cv02824/587361, started on April 11, 2014. It's about Bankruptcy Withdrawal, happening with Judge Jesus G. Bernal.
Plaintiff   versus   Defendant
VIDA VENNERMERCK & CO INC
[Case # 14-2432], [Filed: May 19, 2014]
[ Personal Injury-Product Liability§ ⚖ ]

Petitioner   versus   Respondent
In re: GILBERT FERNANDEZ
More Information
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
[Case # 14-12302], [Filed: May 23, 2014]
[ Other§ ⚖ ]

ᐅ ATTORNEY GENERAL
Plaintiff   versus   Defendant
CFI CLASS ACTION CLAIMANTSCARL SINGLEY, As Disbursing Agent, Litigation Designee and Responsible Officer for the Liquidating Debtors
[Case # 14-2888], [Filed: June 04, 2014]
[ Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158§ ⚖ ]

ᐅ As Disbursing Agent, ᐅ Litigation Designee
California,   May 27, 2014
Case 3:2014cv01303/444061

At the US District Court for the Southern District of California, the legal case 3:2014cv01303/444061 entails IPDEV Co. and Ameranth, Inc., IPDEV Co. The filing date is May 27, 2014, and this case deals with Patent as per 35 U.S.C. § 271. Judge William V. Gallo, Dana M. Sabraw is presiding over this matter, and no jury trial is demanded.
Plaintiff   versus   DefendantRespondent
Integrated Global Concepts
More Information
Advanced Messaging Technologies Inc, Integrated Global Concepts, Inc., Advanced Messaging Technologies Inc and J2 Global Inc
[Case # 2014cv05128/593482], [Filed: July 02, 2014]
[ Contract: Other§ ⚖ ]
[Judge: Dean D. Pregerson, Andrew J. Wistrich]
Plaintiff   versus   Defendant
IMPERIAL TOBACCO CANADA LTD GENSTAR CORPJAMES J. MCMONAGLE, in his capacity as Future Claims Representative and OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF ASBESTOS PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMANTS
[Case # 14-3367], [Filed: July 24, 2014]
[ Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158§ ⚖ ]

ᐅ JAMES J. MCMONAGLE, ᐅ in his capacity as Future Claims Representative
Plaintiff   versus   Defendant
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA$2, 279.00 IN CURRENCY
[Case # 13-2180], [Filed: October 15, 2013]
[ Drug Related Seizure of Property§ ⚖ ]

California,   August 14, 2014
Case 3:2014cv01911/450658

In case 3:2014cv01911/450658 within US District Court for the Southern District of California, Intergulf Construction Corporation brings a case against Hartford Casualty Insurance Company and Does 1 through 500, Intergulf Construction Corporation. Filed on August 14, 2014, this legal matter relates to Insurance as per 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The presiding judge is Larry Alan Burns, Bernard G. Skomal, and the Plaintiff has made a request for a jury trial.


Court records are widely used for a multitude of purposes, but whatever your specific reason, their main objective is to provide information.

To put it simply, court records provide data in black and white. Ask a Lawyer

Leave a Comment