Cases 31 - 40 of 40
Gillespie v. Bailey et al
as 1:2009cv00580
Plaintiff:
Clyde James Gillespie, Jr
Defendant:
Nancy Bailey, James Weeden and Michelle Auger
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McLeon v. DMB Financial
as 1:2009cv11007
Plaintiff:
Clyde McLeon
Defendant:
DMB Finanical LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION et al v. CANYON CREEK DEVELOPMENT INC et al
as 2:2009mc00070
Plaintiff:
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Defendant:
SUNWEST MANAGEMENT INC, CANYON CREEK DEVELOPMENT INC, CANYON CREEK FINANCIAL LLC and others
Receiver:
MICHAEL A GRASSMUECK
Williams v. Hampden County Correctional Center
as 3:2008cv30224
Plaintiff:
Clyde Williams
Defendant:
Hampden County Correctional Center
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Williams v. Superintendent North Central Correctional Institution et al
as 4:2008cv40107
Plaintiff:
Clyde Williams
Defendant:
Superintendent North Central Correctional Institution and Superintendent Mass. Correctional Institution at Concord
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
AIR & WATER QUALITY INC v CLYDE TARR et al
as 2:2007cv00123
Plaintiff:
AIR & WATER QUALITY INC
Defendant:
CLYDE TARR and RADON DONE RIGHT LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv00254
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Williams v. Massachusetts Department of Corrections
as 1:2007cv11122
Petitioner:
Clyde Williams
Respondent:
Massachusetts Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
NILLSON-BORRILL v. BURNHEIMER et al
as 2:2007cv00098
Plaintiff:
STEPHANIE A NILLSON-BORRILL
Defendant:
SCOTT BURNHEIMER , MARTIN MAGNUSSON , CLYDE TRIPP and others
Movant:
JANE DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
