Cases filed in the Sixth Circuit Courts
Cases 11 - 20 of 5,700
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01399
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2024cv03669
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Nessel v. The Wine Store of Marlborough Inc
as 2:2024cv12175
Plaintiff: Dana Nessel, Attorney General for the State of Michigan
Defendant: The Wine Store of Marlborough Inc
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Jacques Smith v. David Yost, et al
as 24-3608
Defendant: MARK TEKULVE, Clermont County Prosecutor, MIKE DEWINE, Ohio Governor, DAVID YOST, Ohio Attorney General and others
Plaintiff: JACQUES E. SMITH
Jose Tellez-Ortiz v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3707
Petitioner: JOSE TELLEZ-ORTIZ
Respondent: MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Mario Bravo v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3706
Respondent: MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Petitioner: MARIO TAPIA BRAVO
Liu v. Mayorkas et al
as 2:2024cv02413
Defendant: Lynuel Dennis, Alejandro Mayorkas and Attorney General Merrick Garland
Plaintiff: Xiang Liu
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Warner, Jr. v. May We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2024cv01113
Petitioner: Danny Lee Warner, Jr.
Respondent: Montana Attorney General and Warden Harold May
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Carlos Orta Martinez v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3703
Respondent: MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Petitioner: CARLOS ORTA MARTINEZ
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01117
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

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.


Why Is My Information Online?