Cases 21 - 30 of 1,144
USA v. Terrence May
as 24-3102
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
TERRENCE CHAUNCEY MAY, aka Terrance May
Krzywkowski v. Mohr et al
as 2:2024cv00374
Plaintiff:
Grady Krzywkowski
Defendant:
Gary Mohr, Mike Davis, Warden Keith Foley and others
Interested Party:
State of Ohio
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hudson v. Village of Buckeye Lake et al
as 2:2024cv00301
Plaintiff:
Jimmy Michael Hudson, II
Defendant:
Village of Buckeye Lake, Buckeye Lake Police Department, Bradley Nicodemus and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Piatt v. May
as 3:2024cv00096
Petitioner:
Kyle C. Piatt
Respondent:
Warden Harold May
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bartulio v. Sterling Heights Police Department et al
as 2:2024cv10128
Plaintiff:
Steven A. Bartulio
Defendant:
Sterling Heights Police Department, Demuynck, Suvaria and others
May v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv04182
Plaintiff:
Brandon May
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv02359
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Mays v. Progress Software Corporation et al
as 3:2023cv00368
Plaintiff:
Brian Mays
Defendant:
Progress Software Corporation, Welltok, Inc. and Premier Health Partners d/b/a Premier Health
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Nichols v. Spalding et al
as 3:2023cv00615
Plaintiff:
David Ronald Nichols
Defendant:
Samuel Todd Spalding, Rhonda Thomas and Kim May
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sands v. May
as 1:2023cv02222
Petitioner:
Joseph A. Sands
Respondent:
Warden Harold May
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
