Cases 51 - 60 of 429
ATKINS v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv02821
Plaintiff:
DARRELL DESHAROD ATKINS, JR.
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
ATKIN v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv02281
Plaintiff:
ETHAN ROY ATKIN
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
ATKINS v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv02311
Plaintiff:
CHARLES ATKINS, JR
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv01401
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Clarke v. Fergueson et al
as 1:2022cv04763
Plaintiff:
Knazier Clarke
Defendant:
Deputy Fergueson, Sgt. John Doe, Craig Owens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Atkins v. Ethicon Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv04697
Plaintiff:
Brian Atkins
Defendant:
Ethicon Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Matthews v. Cobb County et al
as 1:2022cv04550
Plaintiff:
Robert Lee Matthews, Jr.
Defendant:
Cobb County, Sheriff Cobb County Craig Owens, Sheriff Hawk and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Atkins et al v. Unnamed Defendant(s) et al
as 2:2022cv00231
Petitioner:
Peter Jon Atkins and Lawrence Anthony Daddario
Respondent:
Unnamed Respondent(s)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Atkins v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC et al
as 9:2022cv81783
Plaintiff:
Ghia Atkins
Defendant:
GlaxoSmithKline LLC, GlaxoSmithKline (America) Inc., GlaxoSmithkline PLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Miles v. Anthony et al
as 1:2022cv03805
Plaintiff:
Rodney Jerome Miles
Defendant:
C/O Anthony, DW Mims, DW Chambers 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.
