Cases 21 - 30 of 923
Brooks v. Lilly et al
as 5:2024cv00122
Plaintiff:
Clarence Brooks
Defendant:
Amanda Lilly and Oklahoma State of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Oklahoma State of v. Thompson
as 5:2024cv00260
Plaintiff:
Oklahoma State of
Defendant:
Donell Thompson, Jr. doing business as Donell Jr Thompson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Mendenhall v. Oklahoma State of
as 5:2024cv00115
Plaintiff:
Jessie Mendenhall
Defendant:
Oklahoma State of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00034
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McKaufman v. Oklahoma City Police Department et al
as 5:2024cv00038
Plaintiff:
Deonte Martize McKaufman
Defendant:
Oklahoma City Police Department, Oklahoma State of, Susan Stallings and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Jones v. Oklahoma State of
as 5:2024cv00013
Petitioner:
William D Jones
Respondent:
Oklahoma State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Washington v. Gilmore et al
as 4:2023cv00549
Plaintiff:
Donna Washington
Defendant:
Naciska Gilmore, Latressa Avery, Charene Nowicki and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hendricks v. Oklahoma State of
as 5:2023cv01078
Petitioner:
Allen Ray Hendricks
Respondent:
Oklahoma State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Oklahoma State of v. Smith
as 5:2024cv00027
Plaintiff:
Oklahoma State of
Defendant:
Zackry Deon Smith Corp. Sole doing business as Zackry Deon Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv01024
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
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.
