Cases 91 - 100 of 101
SMITH v. PINION
as 1:2010cv00029
Petitioner:
KALVIN MICHAEL SMITH
Respondent:
TODD PINION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
US v. Michael Smith
as 09-4961
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
MICHAEL SMITH
Kevin Smith v. US
as 09-1651
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KEVIN MICHAEL SMITH
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - None:
PATRIBA CHITTRA MEDDA, a/k/a Petriba Chittra Medda, a/k/a Chitra Medda, a/k/a Chiddra Medda, a/k/a Chittra Medda, VMAC Salisbury and Chrlotte Clinic 1601 Brenner Ave Salisbury, NC 28144
Smith v. Truland Systems Corporation
as 8:2009cv01422
Plaintiff:
Michael Smith
Defendant:
Truland Systems Corporation and Truland Systems Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Smith v. Medda
as 3:2008cv00427
Plaintiff:
Kevin Michael Smith
Defendant:
Patriba Chittra Medda
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Case et al v. The Commonwealth of Virginia et al
as 1:2008cv00811
Plaintiff:
Samuel Ray Case, Minor #1 and Minor #2
Defendant:
The Commonwealth of Virginia, The County of Fairfax, Virginia, Michael Elliott and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Case et al v. The Commonwealth of Virginia et al
as 1:2008cv00810
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Paoli Case, Minor #1, Valerie Martin and others
Defendant:
The Commonwealth of Virginia, The County of Fairfax, Virginia, Michael Elliott and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2008cv00429
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Smith v. Warden
as 1:2007cv03256
Plaintiff:
Michael Smith
Defendant:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Reynolds
as 2:2007cv01251
Plaintiff:
Michael Smith
Defendant:
Cecilia R Reynolds
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
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.
