US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi Other Statutes Cases
Cases 41 - 50 of 127
The Mississippi Bar v. Mauk-Williams
as 3:2020ad00003
Respondent:
Charlene Mauk-Williams
Interested Party:
Arthur Johnston, Katherine Alexander, Porfi Stokes and others
Plaintiff:
The Mississippi Bar
The Mississippi Bar v. Abioto
as 3:2020ad00002
Interested Party:
Arthur Johnston, Katherine Alexander, Porfi Stokes and others
Respondent:
Wanda X. Abioto
Plaintiff:
The Mississippi Bar
Criswell v. Lumumba et al
as 3:2020cv00294
Defendant:
Chokwe Antar Lumumba and City of Jackson, Mississippi
Plaintiff:
Dana Criswell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
The Mississippi Bar v. Cotton
as 3:2020ad00001
Interested Party:
Arthur Johnston, Katherine Alexander, Porfi Stokes and others
Respondent:
Ramel L. Cotton
Plaintiff:
The Mississippi Bar
Harris v. Anthony, et al
as 3:2020cv00120
Defendant:
Dr. Dwalia S. South, Dr. Thad Waites, Wheeler Timothy Timbs, III and others
Plaintiff:
Donna Harris
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LawHQ, LLC et al v. Kilgore
as 3:2020cv00045
Defendant:
Adam Kilgore
Plaintiff:
LawHQ, LLC and Thomas Alvord
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Keesler Air Force Base
as 1:2019cv00903
Plaintiff:
Nigellus Devonte Davis
Defendant:
Keesler Air Force Base
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
The Mississippi Bar v. Tucker
as 3:2019ad00011
Interested Party:
Katherine Alexander, Sandra E Campbell and Arthur Johnston
Respondent:
Samuel L. Tucker
Plaintiff:
The Mississippi Bar
The Mississippi Bar v. Flechas
as 3:2019ad00010
Interested Party:
David C. Bramlette, III, Arthur Johnston, Katherine Alexander and others
Respondent:
Eduardo A. Flechas
Plaintiff:
The Mississippi Bar
The Mississippi Bar v. Gibbons
as 3:2019ad00009
Interested Party:
Katherine Alexander, Sandra E Campbell and Arthur Johnston
Respondent:
David Cartan Loker Gibbons, Jr.
Plaintiff:
The Mississippi Bar
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.
