Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Lumsden v. Lumpkin
as 21-50272
Defendant / Appellee:
Assistant Warden Nick Clayton, H. M. Pederson, Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Raymond E. Lumsden
Sowell v. Richardson
as 21-20136
Defendant / Appellee:
Michelle Northcutt, Captain Hill, H. M. Pederson and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Kenneth Sowell
Higgins v. Lumpkin
as 21-20058
Defendant / Appellee:
H. M. Pederson, Assistant Director, Kelly Strong, Warden, C. Lacox, Assistant Warden and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Lawrence Higgins
Lumsden v. Lumpkin
as 20-50912
Defendant / Appellee:
Assistant Warden Nick Clayton, H. M. Pederson, Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Raymond E. Lumsden
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2012cv02369
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22
McDonald v. Pike et al
as 1:2011mc00442
Defendant:
La Vista Partners - GP, LLC, Jimmy Nassour and H. M. Pike, Jr.
In Re:
La Vista Partners, L.P.
Plaintiff:
Mary Guerrero McDonald
Notice Only Party:
Judge H. Christopher Mott
Trustee:
C. Daniel Roberts
512:
United States Bankruptcy Court
H&M Oil & Gas LLC v. Brazos 440 Prt LP, et al
as 08-50481
Debtor - (null):
In the Matter of: LOTHIAN OIL INC, LOTHIAN OIL (USA), LOTHIAN OIL TEXAS I, INC and others
Appellant:
H&M OIL & GAS LLC
Appellee:
BRAZOS 440 PARTNERS LP, NAWAB ENERGY PARTNERS, LP, FRIO ENERGY PARTNERS, LP and others
Arkla Disposal Services Inc et al v. Shreveport et al
as 5:2007cv00350
Plaintiff:
Arkla Disposal Services Inc, Arkla Disposal Services Inc, John E Tuma and others
Defendant:
City of Shreveport, H M Strong and H M Strong
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Zubair v. Mukasey
as 06-60214
Petitioner:
A H M ZUBAIR
Respondent:
MICHAEL B MUKASEY, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL
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.
