Cases 41 - 50 of 291
Mullis, Jr. v. Clark et al
as 8:2022cv01409
Plaintiff:
William Tony Mullis, Jr.
Defendant:
Clark, Carron, Klinect and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Peacock v. Alvarez-Sowles et al
as 8:2022cv01093
Plaintiff:
Randall Laurel Peacock
Defendant:
Nikki Alvarez-Sowles, David M. Caples, Deanna Giannini and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Erod Xaragua El v. Michael Braem, et al
as 22-11343
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EROD HABIB XARAGUA EL
Defendant / Appellee:
MICHAEL BRAEM, DEANNA K. LEE and CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
Tomlinson v. Steele et al
as 1:2022cv00069
Plaintiff:
Deanna Tomlinson
Defendant:
Russell Ray Steele and Smart Express Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence
MAYNARD v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 3:2021cv04879
Plaintiff:
DEANNA MAYNARD
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
FROBENIUS v. 3M Company et al
as 3:2021cv04198
Plaintiff:
JOHN FROBENIUS, TERRY GERMANY, RONALD GILCHRIST and others
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PARKER v USA
as 4:2021cv00494
Petitioner:
DEANNA PARKER
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Xaragua El v. Braem et al
as 8:2021cv02742
Plaintiff:
Erod Habib Xaragua El
Defendant:
Michael Braem, Deanna K. Lee and Charter Communications, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2021cv00532
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Hyden v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv04218
Plaintiff:
Deanna Hyden
Defendant:
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Teva Womens Health, LLC, Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
