Cases 41 - 50 of 536
Thornton v. Pittman et al
as 3:2023cv00129
Petitioner:
Shedrick Thornton
Respondent:
Michael Pittman, FNU Doyle, FNU Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00034
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2022cv00969
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Not Classified By Court:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Burns v. Stephens et al
as 1:2022cv00522
Plaintiff:
William Burns
Defendant:
Zena Stephens, FNU Shawnburger and FNU Guillory
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Roberts v. Haspel et al
as 3:2022cv00396
Plaintiff:
Joseph Thomas Roberts
Defendant:
Gina Cheri Haspel, William Burns, Brian C. Hawthorne and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McDonald v. Brown et al
as 5:2022cv01312
Plaintiff:
Kimberly A. McDonald
Defendant:
Kimbel L. Brown, Jack Robinson, Wilbur & Myrna George and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burns v. First Colony Mall, LLC et al
as 4:2022cv03976
Plaintiff:
Phoebe Burns
Defendant:
First Colony Mall, LLC and Lionstone Partners Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
Burns v. Conservice, LLC
as 5:2022cv01011
Plaintiff:
Paul Burns
Defendant:
Conservice, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
United States of America v. Burns et al
as 4:2022cv03226
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
ANITA BURNS and DOUGLAS BURNS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Shanks v. City of Arlington, Texas et al
as 4:2022cv00573
Plaintiff:
Dawnyale Shanks
Defendant:
City of Arlington, Texas, Super 8 Worldwide, Inc., Natha Hospitality Group, LP and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
