Cases 1 - 10 of 116
Strange v. McAfee LLC
as 2:2023cv00621
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
McAfee LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Strange v. Gateway Voip Provider et al
as 2:2023cv00622
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Gateway Voip Provider and Does Nos. 1-5
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Martinez v. Ibanez et al
as 5:2023cv00275
Plaintiff:
Michael A. Martinez
Defendant:
John Ibanez, Luis Rodriguez, Chase Daniel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mosley et al v. Bristow U.S., LLC et al
as 2:2023cv02674
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Mosley, Steven Tucker, Grayson Young and others
Defendant:
Bristow U.S., LLC, Bristow Group, Inc. and Bristow Holdings U.S., Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Strange v. TDCJ-CID
as 5:2023cv00076
Plaintiff:
David Earl Strange
Defendant:
TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Strange v. Direct Funding Now L L C et al
as 5:2023cv00425
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Direct Funding Now L L C, I P Horizon L L C and Does 1-5
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227 Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Strange v. U.S. Bank Trust Company, N.A.
as 4:2023cv00796
Plaintiff:
Robert Strange
Defendant:
U.S. Bank Trust Company, N.A.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Strange v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 5:2023cv00014
Petitioner:
David Earl Strange
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Strange v. Daisy
as 5:2023cv00101
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Daisy
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Strange v. Hudson Legacy Holdings LLC et al
as 5:2023cv00082
Plaintiff:
Clinton Strange
Defendant:
Hudson Legacy Holdings L L C and Kendrick Michael Hudson
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227 Telephone Consumer Protection 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.
