Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-2254
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Mawule Tepe v. Clifton Corker
as 23-1976
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MAWULE TEPE
Defendant / Appellee:
CLIFTON LELAND CORKER, in his Honorable U.S. District Judge and personal positions, TRAVIS R. MCDONOUGH, in his Honorable U.S. District Judge and personal positions, KATHERINE A. CRYTZER, in her Honorable U.S. District Judge and personal positions and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1902
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Sudama Gibbons v. Donna Smith
as 20-6744
Petitioner / Appellant:
SUDAMA LEROY GIBBONS
Respondent / Appellee:
DONNA M. SMITH
Rhonda Kirschmann v. State of Virginia
as 19-2335
Defendant / Appellee:
CHESAPEAKE CIRCUIT COURT, NANCY PARR, Commonwealth's Attorney for the City of Chesapeake, SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RHONDA KIRSCHMANN, and those similarly situated
US v. Sudama Gibbons
as 19-7021
Defendant / Appellant:
SUDAMA LEROY GIBBONS, a/k/a Sudhama Leroy Gibbons
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Denise Gibbon v. Andrew Saul
as 19-1650
Defendant / Appellee:
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, in her official capacity of Acting Commissioner of Social Security and ANDREW SAUL, in his official capacity of Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DENISE GIBBON
Rafeal Barrett v. T. Gibbon
as 15-7857
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RAFEAL BARRETT
Defendant - Appellee:
SGT. T. GIBBONS and MR. ADGER, Inspector General
Defendant:
NURSE T. JAMES
William Hale v. Erin Gibbon
as 13-1053
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM E. HALE
Defendant - Appellee:
ERIN GIBBONS, in his individual capacity
Defendant:
CITY OF MARTINSBURG, West Virginia and MICHAEL JONES, in his individual capacity
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.
