Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Damron v. Major D. J. et al
as 5:2021cv00085
Plaintiff:
Jonathan T. Damron, Randy Howerton, Brandon Michel Lane and others
Defendant:
Southern Regional Jail and Correctional Center, Sgt. Cox, Corp. Sturgil and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane v. Major D. J. et al
as 5:2021cv00115
Defendant:
Corp. Mitchum, Corp. Hanes, Corp. Pack and others
Plaintiff:
Brandon Michel Lane
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Howerton v. J. et al
as 5:2021cv00117
Defendant:
Corp. Mitchum, Corp. Pack, Corp. Sampson and others
Plaintiff:
Randy Howerton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane v. Major D. J. et al
as 5:2021cv00114
Defendant:
Corp. Mitchum, Corp. Hanes, Corp. Pack and others
Plaintiff:
Floyd Michel Lane
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Haning v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv04794
Plaintiff:
Thurman R Haning
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hanes et al v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 2:2014cv22919
Plaintiff:
Shelley Hanes and Daniel Hanes
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hanes v. American Medical Systems, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv09846
Plaintiff:
Mitzi G. Hanes
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc., C. R. Bard, Inc. and Tissue Science Laboratories Limited
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Arnold v. Glandon et al
as 2:2013cv21891
Plaintiff:
Donah H. Arnold
Defendant:
Nathan Glandon, Pat K. Hanes and Damon Sammons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hane et al v. Boston Scientific Corporation
as 2:2013cv19312
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Hane and Dan Hane
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Haning v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 2:2012cv01912
Plaintiff:
Janice Haning
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
