Cases 41 - 50 of 362
Wells v. Cox et al
as 7:2022cv01268
Plaintiff:
David Donnell Wells
Defendant:
Phyllis Cox and LaDon Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DUNHAM v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv21951
Plaintiff:
LANDY DONNELL DUNHAM
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Graham v. Stovall et al
as 9:2022cv81629
Plaintiff:
Christa Donnell Graham
Defendant:
Gordon C. Stovall, James Butler and Julio-Cesar Gomez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State Prisoner Civil Rights
Stone et al v. Kemp et al
as 1:2022cv03389
Petitioner:
Alfred Lee Stone, Hattie Byrd, Eddie Byrd and others
Respondent:
Brian Kemp, Jimmy S. Smith and Georgia Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARMAN v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv19133
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DONNELL HARMAN, III
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Stokes v. United States of America
as 1:2022cv22418
Plaintiff:
David Donnel Stokes
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Huey v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al(Polk County)
as 8:2022cv01744
Petitioner:
Donnell Emanuelle Huey
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General, State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
KING v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv13724
Plaintiff:
BILLY DONNELL KING
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
HALL v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv14046
Plaintiff:
STEPHEN DONNELL HALL
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
MCCARRELL v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv10999
Plaintiff:
Charles Donnell McCarrell and CHARLES DONNELL MCCARRELL, JR
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
