Cases 21 - 30 of 60
Wood v. Baker
as 1:2015cv00009
Defendant:
Jamie L. Baker
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Respondent:
William Stephens
Plaintiff:
Roger Doyle Wood
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Owens v. Baker et al
as 2:2014cv00067
Plaintiff:
Ronroyal J Owens
Defendant:
Jamie L Baker, Gerald Wayne Whitfield, Jr and Jill Meyer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Yessenow v. Baker
as 5:2013cv01031
Defendant:
Michael L. Baker
Plaintiff:
Dr. Jeffrey R. Yessenow
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401 IRS: Tax Liability
Stokes v. Baker et al
as 2:2013cv00170
Plaintiff:
Forrest Lee Stokes
Defendant:
Jamie L Baker, Michael Hooten, Darrell K Nash and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hoskin et al v. Hughes, Watters & Askanase LLP et al
as 3:2012cv05272
Plaintiff:
Mia Hoskin and David M Wethy
Defendant:
Hughes, Watters & Askanase LLP, Mortgage Electronic Registration System Inc, Bank of America and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Baker v. Director TDCJ-CID
as 7:2012cv00183
Petitioner:
Debra L Baker
Respondent:
Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
USA v. Robert Baker
as 12-10834
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
ROBERT L. BAKER
Baker et al v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc et al
as 6:2012cv02084
Plaintiff:
Robert L Baker and Kathryn Baker
Defendant:
Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc, Takeda Pharmaceuticals U S A Inc, Eli Lilly & Co and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Love et al v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
as 3:2011cv03593
Plaintiff:
Dewey R Love , Morris E Davis , Donald L Baker and others
Defendant:
Union Pacific Railroad Company
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51
Baker v. Astrue
as 3:2011cv03497
Plaintiff:
Carol L Baker
Defendant:
Michael J Astrue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402
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.
