Search for: "Phillips v. No Defendants Named" Results 181 - 200 of 539
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Mar 2014, 7:32 am by Joy Waltemath
Relying on Wiggins v Phillip Morris, Inc., the defendant claimed he could not have violated Sec. 1681(b) because he was a “user” of consumer information, rather than a consumer reporting agency. [read post]
9 Feb 2014, 2:27 pm
  The key components come from the ‘Advocaat’ case (Erven Warnink B.V. v J. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 8:14 am by WSLL
Affirmed.Case Name: ANDREW MASCARENAS v. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 8:47 am by WSLL
Reversed and remanded.Case Name: DEBORA McEWAN v. [read post]
19 Dec 2013, 8:17 am by WSLL
Affirmed.Case Name: LASHAWN SIDNEY KING v. [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 8:15 am by WSLL
Affirmed.Case Name: MICHAEL ANTONIO PATTERSON v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 9:32 am by WSLL
Reversed and remanded in part.Case Name: JAIME SOLIS v. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 8:18 am by WSLL
Affirmed.Case Name: SHELLEY MOORE v. [read post]