Cases 21 - 30 of 116
PROSPER ABBEY v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY et al
as 1:2020cv00728
Plaintiff:
PROSPER ABBEY and RAPHIOU PROSPER ABBEY
Defendant:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION SERVICES, KEVIN K. MCALEENAN and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0555 b
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv00564
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Wesley Carroll v. DOJ
as 19-5317
Defendant / Appellee:
United States Department of Justice
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Wesley Carroll
David Stephenson v. William Barr
as 19-5302
Respondent / Appellee:
William P. Barr, Attorney General
Petitioner / Appellant:
David Carroll Stephenson
BRANDHORST v. TRUDEAU et al
as 1:2019cv02778
Defendant:
HUGH O'NEILL, DAVID NORTON, JOANN REED and others
Plaintiff:
LYNN BRANDHORST
WALKER et al v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 1:2019cv02769
Plaintiff:
VICTOR JOHNSON, KENNETH WATKINS, JERICUO MISSOURI and others
Defendant:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SALHA v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY et al
as 1:2019cv02183
Defendant:
U.S. CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION SERVICES, KEVIN K. MCALEENAN, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY and others
Plaintiff:
MAHMOUD SALHA
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1101
HOOD v. CITY OF CHICAGO
as 1:2019mc00123
Not Yet Classified:
NICHOLAS SCHMIDLE
Defendant:
CITY OF CHICAGO, ELIZABETH SHINN, MICHAEL CLANCY and others
Plaintiff:
TYRONE HOOD
STEPHENSON v. BARR
as 1:2019cv02161
Petitioner:
DAVID CARROLL STEPHENSON
Respondent:
WILLIAM P. BARR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
CARROLL v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 1:2019cv02036
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC., JOHNSON & JOHNSON and PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS COUNCIL
Plaintiff:
LANELLE CARROLL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
