Cases 21 - 30 of 81
Albert Robinson v. Adam Kandulski, et al
as 19-1288
Defendant / Appellee:
SARAH ALTON, Nurse, MICHAEL P. MILLETTE, Physician Assistant, JOCQUE BENOIT, Correctional Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALBERT REGINALD ROBINSON
Albert Robinson v. Adam Kandulski, et al
as 19-1221
Defendant / Appellee:
SARAH ALTON, Nurse, MICHAEL P. MILLETTE, Physician Assistant, JOCQUE BENOIT, Correctional Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALBERT REGINALD ROBINSON
Samantha Rajapakse v. Credit Acceptance Corporation, et al
as 19-1192
Defendant / Appellee:
BRETT A. ROBERTS, GLENDA FLANAGAN, CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SAMANTHA DELANE RAJAPAKSE
Albert Robinson v. Adam Kandulski, et al
as 19-1330
Defendant / Appellee:
SARAH ALTON, Nurse, MICHAEL P. MILLETTE, Physician Assistant, JOCQUE BENOIT, Correctional Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALBERT REGINALD ROBINSON
Gary Dressler v. Bradford Rice, et al
as 17-3850
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GARY DRESSLER
Defendant - Appellee:
BRADFORD RICE, SAFE ENVIRONMENT BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, INC., JEFFREY ZUCKER and others
Dawan Thurmond v. Southfield Police Department
as 17-1550
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAWAN PIERCE THURMOND
Defendant - Appellee:
SOUTHFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT
USA v. Michael Pierce
as 17-1317
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
MICHAEL DAVID PIERCE
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 17-3207
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 16-2748
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Med Protective Company v. Center for Advanced Spine Tech, et al
as 16-4341
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MEDICAL PROTECTIVE COMPANY
Defendant - Appellee:
CENTER FOR ADVANCED SPINE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ABUBAKAR AITQ DURRANI, MD, KELLY ANN LEMASTER and others
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.
