Cases 181 - 190 of 10,881
Shuaib Haji Mohamed v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3623
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Petitioner:
SHUAIB ABDI HAJI MOHAMED
Maclin v. Bonner et al
as 2:2024cv02522
Defendant:
K. Perkins, C. Austin, B. Speights and others
Plaintiff:
Adrian Kentron Maclin, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sk Ahmed, et al v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3621
Petitioner:
SHIRIN AKHTAR, S K KAIF AHMED, SK SALAUDDIN AHMED and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
v. Creative Restaurants, Inc. d/b/a Rum Boogie Cafe et al
as 2:2024cv02514
Defendant:
Creative Restaurants, Inc. d/b/a Rum Boogie Cafe and Belly Martinez-Mendez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Abdullah v. Lee et al
as 3:2024cv00869
Defendant:
David B. Rausch and William Byron Lee
Plaintiff:
Mustafa Abdullah
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bhavanaben Patel, et al v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3614
Petitioner:
DINESHKUMAR MADHAVLAL PATEL, BHAVANABEN DINESHKUMAR PATEL, ILEN PATEL and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Deysi Aviles-Solano, et al v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3610
Petitioner:
CARLOS ERNESTO MERINO-AVILES, JIMMY ADONAY MERINO-AVILES and DEYSI DE JESUS AVILES-SOLANO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Alger et al v. Campbell et al
as 2:2024cv11831
Defendant:
George Stephenson, Greason, Brockway and others
Plaintiff:
Theresa Wilson and Joshua Levi Alger
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Singleton v. Nashville Police Dept. et al
as 3:2024cv00841
Defendant:
Nashville Police Dept., Tennessee State Police, Nashville, City of and others
Plaintiff:
Timothy Singleton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Raed Kashat v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3597
Petitioner:
RAED SALIM KASHAT
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
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.
