Cases 21 - 30 of 176
David Meyers v. D. Roundtree
as 21-6723
Defendant / Appellee:
MARTIN BRYANT, Warden, FISCAL TECH KRUSE, A. BROWN, Intel Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
David Meyers v. Mosley
as 21-6670
Defendant / Appellee:
GRIEVANCE COORDINATOR MOSLEY, SERGEANT DIAL, MS. DARBY, Intel Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
David Meyers v. Director of Action Alliance Commonwealth of VAPREA
as 21-6672
Defendant / Appellee:
OFFICER BROWN, SXI Intel Officer, PEODE, SX1 Physician, MAJOR RUFFIN and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
David Meyers v. J. Brown
as 21-6669
Defendant / Appellee:
SERGEANT DIAL, A. WELLINTON, UNIT MANAGER J. BROWN and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
David Meyers v. Warden I. Hamilton
as 21-6660
Defendant / Appellee:
TONYA FOREMAN, DR. ULEP, TINYA FOREMAN and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
Margaret A. Randolph, Trustee v. Gifford, Jr. et al
as 3:2021cv00209
Defendant:
W. Leo Kiely III, Debra J. Kelly-Ennis, John T. Casteen III and others
Plaintiff:
Margaret A. Randolph, Trustee
West Town Bank & Trust v. Joseph Somerville, III
as 21-125
Respondent:
GILMAN HOFFMAN, MARK KLINE, RANDOLPH WHITLEY and others
Petitioner:
WEST TOWN BANK & TRUST, a/k/a West Town Savings Bank
Randolph Johnson v. Labravia Jenkins
as 21-6191
Defendant / Appellee:
MICHAEL HARDIMAN, In Public and Private Capacity, LABRAVIA J. JENKINS, in Public and Private Capacity, PAUL W. HIGGS, In Public and Private Capacity and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RANDOLPH WAKEEM JOHNSON
Joseph Mays v. T. Smith
as 20-7540
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JOSEPH RANDOLPH MAYS
Defendant / Appellee:
J. HALFAST, Case Manager, OFFICER SLAYDON, OFFICER GLASS and others
Interested Party:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
US v. Ronald McKinney
as 20-7215
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
RONALD RANDOLPH MCKINNEY
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.
