Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1130
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Intervenor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Amicus Curiae:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1078
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Intervenor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Amicus Curiae:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Range v. Van Metre et al
as 1:2020cv00123
Defendant:
Amazon.com, Stacey, Magistrate Judge Michael Nachmanoff and others
Plaintiff:
Davetta Lynn Range
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Intl Refugee Assistance v. Donald J. Trump
as 17-1351
Plaintiff / Appellee:
INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT, a project of the Urban Justice Center, Inc., on behalf of itself and its clients, HIAS, INC., on behalf of itself and its clients, MUHAMMED METEAB and others
Defendant / Appellant:
DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF STATE and others
Amicus Curiae:
STATE OF TEXAS, STATE OF ALABAMA, STATE OF ARIZONA and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-2056
Amicus Curiae:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Not Yet Classified:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Earl Richardson v. The Great State of Maryland
as 08-1802
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EARL L. RICHARDSON
Defendant - Appellee:
THE GREAT STATE OF MARYLAND, CECIL COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICE, NICHOLAS RICCIUTI, Director of Cecil County Department of Socail Services and others
Richardson v. The Grate State of Maryland et al
as 1:2008cv01087
Plaintiff:
Earl L. Richardson
Defendant:
The Grate State of Maryland, Cecil County Department of Social Service, Nicholas Ricciuti and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
