Cases 81 - 90 of 209
Artis v. Parvin
as 1:2018cv00353
Plaintiff:
Tamara Artis
Defendant:
Pagemun Parvin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Brandon Roberts v. Bobby Shearin
as 17-7595
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BRANDON ROBERTS
Plaintiff:
RANDY GOLDEN, AUGUSTUS WOODARD and JOHN ARTIS
Defendant - Appellee:
BOBBY P. SHEARIN, Warden
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00595
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Mountain Valley Pipeline, L.L.C. v. An Easement to Construct, Operate and Maintain a 42-Inch Gas Transmission Line Across Properties in the Counties of Nicholas, Greenbrier, Monroe, Summers, Braxton, Harrison, Lewis, Webster, and Wetzel, WV et al
as 2:2017cv04214
Plaintiff:
Mountain Valley Pipeline, L.L.C.
Defendant:
An Easement to Construct, Operate and Maintain a 42-Inch Gas Transmission Line Across Properties in the Counties of Nicholas, Greenbrier, Monroe, Summers, Braxton, Harrison, Lewis, Webster, and Wetzel, D. Lane McMillion, Dale L. McMillion and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
Artis v. Mentally et al
as 3:2017cv00707
Plaintiff:
Brandon Artis
Defendant:
K. Thomas Mentally, Warden Beale, Warden Peagen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 17-7144
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Artis v. Bishop
as 1:2017cv02410
Petitioner:
John Earl Artis
Respondent:
Frank B. Bishop
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Artis v. Wolford et al
as 1:2017cv02409
Plaintiff:
John Earl Artis
Defendant:
Jermey W. Wolford, James A. Strope, Frank B. Bishop and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SLADE v. USA
as 1:2017cv00737
Petitioner:
ARTIS EUGENE SLADE
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Artis v. Berryhill
as 5:2017cv00387
Plaintiff:
Michael Artis
Defendant:
Nancy A. Berryhill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
