Cases 1 - 10 of 90
United States, et al v. Rudolph, et al
as 24-1177
Plaintiff:
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Petitioner:
JULIAN RUDOLPH and ANABIANCA RUDOLPH
Defendant:
LORI MILLIRON and LAWRENCE RUDOLPH
Puana (PS) v. Williams
as 1:2024cv01088
Petitioner:
Rudolph Puana
Respondent:
J. F. Williams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd - Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Dunn, et al v. Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company, et al
as 23-2181
Plaintiff / Appellee:
MICHAEL ANDERSON, BROOKE BALOCCA, SARA BENSON and others
Defendant / Appellant:
R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, REYNOLDS AMERICAN, INC. and SANTA FE NATURAL TOBACCO COMPANY, INC.
Dunn, et al v. Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company, et al
as 23-705
Petitioner:
STEVE OKSTAD, MICHAEL ANDERSON, BROOKE BALOCCA and others
Respondent:
SANTA FE NATURAL TOBACCO COMPANY, INC. and REYNOLDS AMERICAN, INC.
Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company, et al v. Dunn, et al
as 23-706
Petitioner:
SANTA FE NATURAL TOBACCO COMPANY, INC., REYNOLDS AMERICAN, INC. and R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY
Respondent:
ANTHONY DUNN, CEYHAN HAKSAL, MICHAEL ROBINSON and others
United States v. Rudolph
as 23-1278
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
LAWRENCE RUDOLPH
United States v. Drakes
as 23-3152
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
JAHBOU RUDOLPH DRAKES
In re: Rudolph, et al
as 23-1162
Petitioner:
JULIAN RUDOLPH, ANABIANCA RUDOLPH and THE ESTATE OF BIANCA RUDOLPH
Respondent:
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, LORI MILLIRON and LAWRENCE RUDOLPH
Clay v. Lares, et al
as 23-1151
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CARLEOUS DARRELL CLAY
Defendant / Appellee:
DR. L. LARES, DR. RUDOLPH, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and others
Garcia v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
as 2:2023cv02203
Plaintiff:
Rudolph A Garcia and Rudolph A. Garcia
Defendant:
Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
