Cases 141 - 150 of 439
Riley v. United States of America et al
as 1:2018cv01686
Plaintiff:
Marquel D Riley
Defendant:
United States of America and C Remington
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MACKS v. MORGAN et al
as 3:2018cv02138
Defendant:
PENSACOLA POLICE DEPARTMENT, UNITED STATES MARSHALL, JEREMY JARMEN, SR and others
Plaintiff:
GLENN RAY MACKS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Morris v. United States of America et al
as 2:2018cv00103
Defendant:
B Smith, Stanley, Loveless and others
Plaintiff:
John M. Morris
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CHAPPELL v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 5:2018cv00199
Plaintiff:
FRANKIE LEE CHAPPELL
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Asseraf v. United States of America
as 6:2018cv01379
Plaintiff:
Joshua Asseraf
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PRIBYL v. UNITED STATES
as 4:2018cv00365
Defendant:
UNITED STATES
Plaintiff:
FRANTISEK PRIBYL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Trevin Nunnally v. Elizabeth Timothy, et al
as 18-13139
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TREVIN NUNNALLY
Defendant - Appellee:
ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY, US MAGISTRATE JUDGE, JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES, PENSACOLA DIVISION and CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, AS OVERSEER OVER JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES PENSACOLA DIVISION
PRIBYL v. UNITED STATES
as 4:2018cv00349
Defendant:
UNITED STATES
Plaintiff:
FRANTISEK PRIBYL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Edward Barber v. U.S. Attorney General, et al
as 18-13063
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARD EUGENE BARBER
Defendant - Appellee:
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, FEDERAL COURTS OF GEORGIA, ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT and others
THACH v. UNITED STATES MARSHALS (TALLAHASSEE) et al
as 4:2018cv00341
Defendant:
STATE OF FLORIDA, LEON COUNTY SHERIFF OFFICE and UNITED STATES MARSHALS (TALLAHASSEE)
Plaintiff:
NGOC THACH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
