Cases 1 - 10 of 72
Ross v. Finkle et al
as 8:2024cv00915
Plaintiff:
Arthur Lee Ross
Defendant:
Brandon L. Finkle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WORDLAW JR v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv10923
Plaintiff:
ARTHUR LEE WORDLAW JR
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
REID v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv18976
Plaintiff:
ARTHUR LEE REID JR.
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jacobs v. Chilton County Jail et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2022cv00451
Plaintiff:
Arthur Lee Jacobs
Defendant:
Chilton County Jail, Chilton County Judicial System, City of Clanton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jacobs v. Chilton County Jail (INMATE 3)
as 2:2022cv00447
Plaintiff:
Arthur Lee Jacobs
Defendant:
Chilton County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jacobs v. Davis et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2022cv00428
Plaintiff:
Arthur Lee Jacobs
Defendant:
Chilton County Jail, Ann Davis and Trey Barfield
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Arthur Dukes v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al
as 21-13203
Petitioner / Appellant:
ARTHUR LEE DUKES
Respondent / Appellee:
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Lee v. Inch, et al
as 5:2021cv00354
In Re:
E. Hurst
Plaintiff:
James Arthur Lee
Defendant:
Mark Inch, Jon Doe, JHON DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HUDSON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv26245
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
ARTHUR LEE HUDSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
James Lee v. Secretary, Department of Corr., et al
as 21-11232
Defendant / Appellee:
WARDEN, JOHN DOE, State Dietician, JOHN DOE and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES ARTHUR LEE
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.
