Cases 71 - 80 of 215
MCCLURE v. TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL et al
as 1:2019cv00117
Defendant:
TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL, KEN PAXTON, JENNIFER THARP and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT T. MCCLURE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOHNSON v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et al
as 1:2018cv03062
Defendant:
BARRY FREUNDELL, JIMMIE ALLEN, JOHN DOES 1-25 and others
Plaintiff:
DUANE JOSEPH JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
HOLT v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE et al
as 1:2018cv01910
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE, JOHN DOE and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA PAUL HILTON HOLT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ELDRIDGE v. MOTLEY et al
as 1:2018cv01660
Respondent:
NANCY R. PAGE, JOHN DOES, THOMAS J. MOTLEY and others
Petitioner:
CLINTON T. ELDRIDGE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
LEWIS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2018cv01398
Plaintiff:
DUSTIN LEWIS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and DOES 1-25
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
HARRISON v. MALDENADO et al
as 1:2018cv01163
Plaintiff:
CHARLES RANDALL HARRISON
Defendant:
RAUL MALDENADO, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PRASAD v. DELTA SIGMA THETA SORORITY, INC. et al
as 1:2018cv01130
Plaintiff:
SUNDARI KARMA PRASAD
Defendant:
DELTA SIGMA THETA SORORITY, INC., BEVERLY EVANS SMITH, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WEAVER v. RUSSELL et al
as 1:2018cv00961
Plaintiff:
JUSTIN D. WEAVER
Defendant:
MICHAEL D. RUSSELL, RANDOLPH W. SAWYER, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BENJAMIN v. HICKS et al
as 1:2018cv00864
Plaintiff:
LOPEZ P. BENJAMIN
Defendant:
HICKS, HOYLE, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BENOIT v. KANE et al
as 1:2018cv00535
Plaintiff:
AUNDEL BENOIT
Defendant:
RICHARD KANE, KATHLEEN KENNEY, J.L. NORWOOD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
