Cases 11 - 20 of 31
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-1937
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Lawrence Wilder, Sr. v. Wilmington NC Police
as 16-1623
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR.
Defendant - Appellee:
WILMINGTON NC POLICE, NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC SHERIFF'S OFFICE, FEDERAL PROBATION OFFICE and others
Lawrence Wilder, Sr. v. Loretta Lynch
as 16-1622
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR.
Defendant - Appellee:
LORETTA E. LYNCH, US Attorney General, WILMINGTON NC POLICE, FEDERAL PROBATION OFFICE and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 16-1094
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
David Bardes v. L. Auld
as 15-2396
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID A. BARDES, individually, as a taxpayer
Defendant - Appellee:
L. PATRICK AULD, Magistrate Judge, CATHERINE C. EAGLES, District Judge, PATRICK MICHAEL DUFFY, Senior U.S. District Judge and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-1674
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Hephzibah Bates v. U.S. Department of Justice
as 15-1644
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HEPHZIBAH BATES
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Investigators Department
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-1046
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
John Dickson, Jr. v. US
as 14-1792
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MR. JOHN MALCOLM DICKSON, JR.
Party-in-Interest:
JOHN M. DICKSON, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Attorney General of the United States of America and UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, For the Eastern District of Virginia
Richard Gravely v. US Department of Justice
as 13-1027
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD GRAVELY
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
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.
