US District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Cases 41 - 50 of 429,311
HARRIS v. AFFIRM HOLDINGS INC
as 3:2024cv00162
Plaintiff:
DESTINEE MONET HARRIS
Defendant:
AFFIRM HOLDINGS INC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
TAN v. DEFENDANT 1 et al
as 3:2024cv00163
Plaintiff:
JONAH TAN
Defendant:
DEFENDANT 1 AKA "Agatha Li" and JOHN DOES 1-20
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00161
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
BRYANT v. KIRKLAND et al
as 5:2024cv00074
Plaintiff:
BUSTER BRYANT
Defendant:
AARON A KIRKLAND, PATTON and ARMSTRONG
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MCDANIEL v. LOWE'S HOME CENTERS LLC
as 3:2024cv00160
Plaintiff:
Stacy McDaniel
Defendant:
Lowe's Home Centers, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
JENKINS v. STATE OF FLORIDA
as 4:2024cv00171
Plaintiff:
JOHNNY JENKINS
Defendant:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CHRISTOPHE v. DOE
as 3:2024cv00159
Plaintiff:
ILMART CHRISTOPHE
Defendant:
JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BOGGS v. DAVIS et al
as 4:2024cv00172
Plaintiff:
HARRY LEE BOGGS, JR
Defendant:
DAVIS, BRICE GOOGLE, D WILLIAMS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
AYERS v. EPIC GAMES INC et al
as 1:2024cv00064
Plaintiff:
SHANE AYERS, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF O.A., A MINOR,
Defendant:
EPIC GAMES, INC., TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, INC., ROCKSTAR GAMES, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
BECK v. ROBERT JOHNSON
as 3:2024cv00157
Plaintiff:
SEAN BECK
Defendant:
ROBERT JOHNSON, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SHERIFF OF SANTA ROSA COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
