Cases 11 - 20 of 93
BERGERON v. HACKER et al
as 1:2020cv01864
Defendant:
FREEMASONS OF THE UNITED STATES, J. BRITT JOHNSON, UNKNOWN AGENTS OF THE GEORGIA BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Plaintiff:
JACOB ANDREW BERGERON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
WRIGHT v. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
as 1:2020cv00185
Defendant:
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff:
CHARLES ANTONIO DEVON WRIGHT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WRIGHT v. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
as 1:2020cv00186
Defendant:
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff:
CHARLES ANTONIO DEVON WRIGHT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WRIGHT v. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
as 1:2020cv00188
Defendant:
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff:
CHARLES ANTONIO DEVON WRIGHT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WRIGHT v. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
as 1:2019cv03866
Defendant:
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff:
CHARLES ANTONIO DEVON WRIGHT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WRIGHT v. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
as 1:2019cv03376
Defendant:
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff:
CHARLES A.D. WRIGHT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MUNOZ v. ARPAIO et al
as 1:2018cv02768
Defendant:
UNKNOWN JUDGE AND GOVERNMENT, JOE ARPAIO and JOSEPH MICHAEL ARPAIO
Plaintiff:
RENATO TREJO MUNOZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv01297
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
R. Johnson v. John Roberts, et al
as 17-5200
Plaintiff - Appellant:
R. Wayne Johnson
Defendant - Appellee:
John Roberts, Chief Judge, C. Thomas, Kennedy, Justice and others
Nathanael Reynolds v. United States District Court, et al
as 17-5163
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Nathanael Lenard Reynolds
Defendant - Appellee:
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Mary Gordon Baker, Magistrate Judge and Bruce Howe Hendricks, Judge
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.
