Cases 21 - 30 of 116
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2020cv03112
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Harris v. United States Department of Justice et al
as 1:2020cv00361
Plaintiff:
Silas Harris
Defendant:
U S Bureau of Prisons, Director of Federal Bureau of Prisons, FNU Miles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Silas Babcock v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director
as 20-50676
Petitioner / Appellant:
Silas Mark Babcock
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Wilburn v. C R Bard Incorporated et al
as 9:2020cv00054
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated and Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated
Plaintiff:
Silas Wilburn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Silas v. Jones et al
as 3:2019cv00928
Defendant:
Unknown Stewart, Rodney Jones, Billy Sparkman and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Plaintiff:
Brandon Silas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Everhardt v. Shaw et al
as 2:2019cv13322
Defendant:
Benton-Georgia LLC of Deleware, Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, Silas Shaw and others
Plaintiff:
Joseph Everhardt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PJSC Uralkali v. Stroll et al
as 1:2019mc01058
Defendant:
Silas Chou and Lawrence Stroll
Plaintiff:
PJSC Uralkali
In Re:
Letter Rogatory
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1782
Babcock v. Davis
as 7:2019cv00206
Petitioner:
Silas Mark Babcock
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID Lorie Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Black v. Jones et al
as 1:2019cv01023
Defendant:
W Peyton Cunningham, Axson Silas, Victor Jones and others
Plaintiff:
**Sanctioned/Barred* Richard Wayne Black
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Silas v. Franklin et al
as 3:2019cv00515
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Defendant:
Lt. Franklin, Joann Shivers and M.D.O.C.
Plaintiff:
Brandon R. Silas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
