Cases 91 - 100 of 374
Samuel Wood v. Larry Arnold
as 19-1526
Appellant:
PROGRESSIVE DIRECT INSURANCE COMPANY
Plaintiff / Appellee:
SAMUEL RUSSELL WOOD
Defendant / Appellant:
LARRY ARNOLD
Cynthia Woods v. S.C. Department of Health
as 19-1606
Defendant:
HOLLIE HOADWONIC and CHRISTIAN L. SOURA
Defendant / Appellee:
KIM BACKMAN, MONA SECHREST, MARSHA BROWN and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CYNTHIA B. WOODS
Akira Technologies, Inc. v. Conceptant, Inc.
as 18-1655
Plaintiff / Appellee:
AKIRA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Defendant / Appellant:
CONCEPTANT, INC., NUCOGNITION, INC., JOSHUA PHIPPS and others
Defendant:
CHIRON SOLUTIONS, INC., DAVID WOOD and SHANNON MUNLEY
R.S. v. Bd of Dir of Woods Charter
as 19-1349
Plaintiff / Appellant:
R.S., By and through his father Ronald E. Soltes
Defendant / Appellee:
WOODS CHARTER SCHOOL, BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF WOODS CHARTER SCHOOL COMPANY and DOES 1-10, Inclusive
Donniel Woods v. Aaron Joyner
as 19-6647
Petitioner / Appellant:
DONNIEL WOODS
Respondent / Appellee:
AARON JOYNER
Jack Boothe v. Northstar Realty Finance Corp.
as 19-1298
Defendant / Appellee:
LOUIS J. PAGLIA, DAVID T. HAMAMOTO, JUDITH A. HANNAWAY and others
Undetermined:
WILLIAM PENNINGTON, MARJORIE WOOD, MICHAEL BUMGARDNER and others
Plaintiff / Appellee:
JACK BOOTHE, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated
Hong Tang v. University of Baltimore
as 19-1146
Defendant / Appellee:
DARLENE BRANNIGAN SMITH, PATRIA DE LANCER JULNES, JOSEPH S. WOOD and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HONG TANG
US v. Frank Thomas
as 19-4080
Defendant / Appellant:
FRANK WOOD THOMAS
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
David Meyers v. US District Ct, Big Stone Gap
as 19-6173
Defendant / Appellee:
HENRY PONTON, J. H. MIDDLETON, J.B. MESSER and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
US v. Wendell Wood
as 19-6230
Defendant / Appellant:
WENDELL WOOD
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
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.
