Cases 1 - 10 of 54
Smith v. Cadence Bank
as 4:2024cv01292
Plaintiff:
Christopher Smith
Defendant:
Cadence Bank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Smith v. State of Mississippi
as 3:2024cv00140
Plaintiff:
Christopher Smith
Defendant:
State of Mississippi
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. USA
as 2:2023cv07383
Petitioner:
Christopher Smith
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate
Smith v. General Motors, LLC
as 3:2023cv01284
Plaintiff:
Tyler Christopher Smith
Defendant:
General Motors, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Smith v. General Motors, LLC
as 3:2023cv00769
Plaintiff:
Tyler Christopher Smith
Defendant:
General Motors, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Smith v. State of Mississippi
as 3:2023cv00518
Plaintiff:
Christopher Smith
Defendant:
State of Mississippi
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Andrews v. Adams et al
as 1:2023cv00095
Plaintiff:
Dessie Andrews
Defendant:
Alma S. Adams, Current and Former Members of Congress, Robert B Aderholt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Smith v. Burger King et al
as 1:2022cv00295
Plaintiff:
Brian Christopher Smith
Defendant:
Burger King, Dhanani Group and Houston Foods, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Brawley v. The City of Dallas, Texas et al
as 3:2022cv01257
Plaintiff:
Michelle Louise Brawley
Defendant:
The City of Dallas, Texas, Department of Family and Protective Services, Troya Farris and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Smith-Emerson v. Director, TDCJ-CID et al
as 5:2021cv00014
Petitioner:
Christopher Smith-Emerson
Respondent:
Officer R Franco and Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
