Cases 61 - 70 of 409
Pugh v. McCovery
as 1:2022cv00322
Petitioner:
Jason Pugh
Respondent:
Warden Cynthia McCovery
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PUGH v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv11437
Plaintiff:
BRANDON LLOYD PUGH
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
DEAL v. PUGH et al
as 3:2022cv10062
Plaintiff:
MARCUS RAMONE DEAL
Defendant:
G PUGH, C NICHOLAS, R PRICE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Parker v. Pugh
as 2:2022cv00722
Plaintiff:
Shaquille Parker
Defendant:
Pugh, Deandrea Pugh, Coleman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pugh v. Garrett et al
as 7:2022cv00667
Petitioner:
Shameca L Pugh
Respondent:
Garrett and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Pugh et al v. Palm Haven Towers Condominium, Inc.
as 0:2022cv60824
Plaintiff:
Heath C Pugh, Amanda G Pugh, Heath Carlton Pugh and others
Defendant:
Palm Haven Towers Condominium Inc and Palm Haven Towers Condominium, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 Fair Housing Act
Daniels v. Greene County Hospital Board et al
as 7:2022cv00268
Plaintiff:
Martha Daniels
Defendant:
Greene County Hospital Board, Greene County Health System Foundation Inc, Greene County Ambulance Service and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Medical Malpractice
Pugh v. Gibson et al
as 1:2022cv00072
Plaintiff:
Brandon Pugh
Defendant:
Ronald Gibson and Lt. Richard Hetrick
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jammie Gordon, II v. Carter, et al
as 22-10537
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMMIE D. GORDON, II
Defendant / Appellee:
CARTER, Lt., BISHOP, Sgt., ALLIGOOD, JR., Officer and others
DEJERINETT v. WHITE et al
as 3:2022cv00798
Plaintiff:
DAVID DEJERINETT
Defendant:
J WHITE, M LOWE, C PUGH 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.
