Cases 1 - 10 of 178
Pickering et al v. Johnson et al
as 1:2024cv04069
Plaintiff:
Tanesha Pickering and Kalani Pickering
Defendant:
Fredrick Johnson, United States Postal Service and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
Fredricks v. May et al
as 9:2024cv00719
Plaintiff:
Nigel Fredricks and Nigel Fredericks
Defendant:
C. May and John Doe Correction Officer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fredricks v. Detective John Doe
as 24-1306
Plaintiff:
NIGEL FREDRICKS
Defendant:
Detective MICHAEL ARDOLINO, Detective DERRICK RUSS, Detective MARK SCARLATELLI and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2024cv00671
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Fredricks v. Comstock
as 1:2024cv03135
Petitioner:
Nigel Fredricks
Respondent:
Comstock
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Jones v. King
as 1:2024cv01330
Petitioner:
Fredrick Jones
Respondent:
M.J. King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mitchell et al v. The 3M Company et al
as 1:2024cv00407
Defendant:
The 3M Company, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., AGC Chemicals Americas Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
George Mitchell, Robert Hendren, Ralph Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 nr Notice of Removal
Fredricks v. Smith
as 24-226
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NIGEL FREDRICKS
Defendant / Appellee:
Correction Officer SMITH, 10686
Fredricks v. Comstock
as 9:2023cv01422
Petitioner:
Nigel Fredricks
Respondent:
Comstock
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Fredricks v. Sergeant John Doe
as 24-9
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NIGEL FREDRICKS
Defendant / Appellee:
Sergeant JOHN DOE, Correctional Officer JANE DOE, Mental Health Dr . JANE DOE and others
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.
