Cases 11 - 20 of 94
ARDIS v. DICKEY et al
as 3:2023cv07017
Plaintiff:
ROBERT MICHAEL ARDIS
Defendant:
DARLENE DICKEY, WILLIAM EDDINS, SARAH HARPER CRUTCHFIELD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MIDDLEBROOKS v. CITY OF MACON-BIBB COUNTY GEORGIA et al
as 5:2023cv00083
Plaintiff:
LILLIE M MIDDLEBROOKS
Defendant:
CITY OF MACON-BIBB COUNTY GEORGIA, ERICA L WOODFORD, TAMIKA BURNETT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BRAZILL v. BRANNON et al
as 5:2023cv00067
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL R BRAZILL
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER R BRANNON, JONATHAN JONES, GLENN E HANCOCK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Berry et al v. Apple, Inc.
as 6:2021cv01379
Plaintiff:
Berry, Dana Berry, Emily Culver and others
Defendant:
Apple, Inc. and Apple Inc
ARDIS v. DICKEY et al
as 4:2023cv00119
Plaintiff:
ROBERT MICHAEL ARDIS
Defendant:
DARLENE DICKEY, WILLIAM EDDINS, SARAH HARPER CRUTCHFIELD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Crutchfield v. Coker Tire Company
as 2:2023cv00038
Plaintiff:
Mike Crutchfield
Defendant:
Coker Tire Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Murzike v. Williams et al
as 3:2023cv00098
Plaintiff:
James T. Murzike
Defendant:
R. Williams, J. Taylor, R. Green and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CRUTCHFIELD v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv00422
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH CRUTCHFIELD
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv04924
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Clark v. Gwinnett County Sheriff's Department et al
as 1:2022cv04201
Plaintiff:
Joe Nathan Clark
Defendant:
Gwinnett County Sheriff's Department, Sgt. Crutchfield, Deputy Gracia and others
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.
