Cases 21 - 30 of 52
USA v. Kelvin Mize
as 13-6558
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
KELVIN JEROLD MIZE
USA v. Jackie Mize
as 13-6560
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
JACKIE MIZE
Askew et al v. Plummer et al
as 1:2013cv02381
Plaintiff:
Judah Askew , Latricia Askew and S. A.
Defendant:
James Plummer, Mize Granite Sales, Inc and Deborah Parsons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence
Burchfield v. Mize
as 1:2012cv00157
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Dennis Burchfield
Defendant:
Tommy Mize, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burchfield v. Mize
as 3:2012cv00498
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Dennis Burchfield
Defendant:
Tommy Mize, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mize v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 1:2012cv00077
Plaintiff:
Martha Faye Mize
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc., Ethicon Women's Health and Urology, Gynecare and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Mize v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
as 1:2012dp21223
Plaintiff:
Adam B. Mize
Defendant:
DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. , DePuy, Inc. , DePuy International Limited and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jason Mize v. Innocentes Sator
as 11-6220
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JASON E. MIZE
Defendant - Appellee:
INNOCENTES SATOR
Loukas #158249 et al v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2011cv01063
Plaintiff:
Michael Loukas #158249 and William F. Graves #100662
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, Department of Technology and Management, Public Communications Service, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mize et al v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc et al
as 5:2011cv02011
Plaintiff:
Samuel Mize and Sharon Mize
Defendant:
Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
