Cases 11 - 20 of 74
David Meyers v. Carl Manis
as 20-7262
Defendant / Appellee:
OFFICER DANIELS, J. ELY, A. W. COMBS and others
Defendant:
JAMES JONES, PAMELA MEADE SARGENT, ROBERT STEWART BALLOU and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
David Meyers v. J. Ely
as 20-7235
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN DOE, J. ELY, LIEUTENANT HUGHES and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
David Meyers v. Carl Manis
as 20-6625
Defendant / Appellee:
OFFICER DANIELS, J. ELY, A. W. COMBS and others
Defendant:
JAMES JONES, PAMELA MEADE SARGENT, ROBERT STEWART BALLOU and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
David Meyers v. J. Ely
as 20-6628
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN DOE, J. ELY, LIEUTENANT HUGHES and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
Livingston v. Roberts et al
as 7:2020cv00254
Defendant:
A. Rivero, C. Manis, J. Ely and others
Plaintiff:
Johntae Remontz Livingston
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Perry v. Dobyns et al
as 3:2020cv00206
Defendant:
S. W. Allen, T. L. Crichenberger, K. M. Dobyns and others
Plaintiff:
Calvin Perry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Perry v. Dobyns et al
as 7:2020cv00179
Defendant:
S. W. Allen, T. L. Crichenberger, K. M. Dobyns and others
Plaintiff:
Calvin Perry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Perry v. Dobyns et al
as 3:2020cv00128
Defendant:
S. W. Allen, T. L. Crichenberger, K. M. Dobyns and others
Plaintiff:
Calvin Perry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Warthan v. Guangzhou Vanlead Group Ltd et al
as 2:2020cv00773
Defendant:
New Zollie Ray Inc, Guangzhou Vanlead Group Ltd, South China Tire and Rubber Company Ltd and others
Plaintiff:
Carol Warthan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Warthan v. Guangzhou Vanlead Group Ltd et al
as 2:2020cv00774
Defendant:
New Zollie Ray Inc, Guangzhou Vanlead Group Ltd, South China Tire and Rubber Company Ltd and others
4Th Party Defendant:
Tiremax Inc
Plaintiff:
Carol Warthan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
