Cases 1 - 10 of 2,260
Heron Cove Association et al v. Midland County Board of Commissioners et al
as 2:2024cv11458
Plaintiff:
Heron Cove Association, Charles Aguirre, Laurie Aquirre and others
Defendant:
Midland County Board of Commissioners and Four Lakes Task Force
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Carol Roth v. Adam Rogers
as 24-5533
Petitioner:
CAROL ROTH
Respondent:
ADAM P. ROGERS, Director of Industry Operations, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives
Norman v. City of Cincinnati et al
as 1:2024cv00309
Plaintiff:
April Norman
Defendant:
City of Cincinnati, Sheryl Long, Art Dahlberg and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
George Sachs v. Ricardo Inc., et al
as 24-1468
Plaintiff:
GEORGE SACHS, dba Paradyme Systems USA
Defendant:
RICARDO INC., WESLEY SCHARMEN, PHILIP MICHAEL and others
Joan Lipin v. Arthur Wisehart, et al
as 24-3445
Plaintiff:
JOAN CAROL LIPIN
Defendant:
ARTHUR DODSON WISEHART and MARK APELMAN
Amos et al v. Davol Inc et al
as 2:2024cv02840
Plaintiff:
Teresa Carol Amos and Ian Amos
Defendant:
Davol Inc and CR Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
George Sachs v. Ricardo Inc., et al
as 24-1420
Plaintiff:
GEORGE SACHS, dba Paradyme Systems USA
Defendant:
RICARDO INC., WESLEY SCHARMEN, PHILIP MICHAEL and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00273
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ashbrook v Meigs County, Tennessee
as 1:2024cv00165
Plaintiff:
Hannah Ashbrook
Defendant:
Meigs County, TN, State of Tennessee, Attorney Casey Stokes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Nationwide Recovery, Incorporated, et al v. City of Detroit, MI
as 24-1401
Plaintiff:
NATIONWIDE RECOVERY, INCORPORATED, JULIA HUSSEIN, HUSSEIN M. HUSSEIN and others
Defendant:
CITY OF DETROIT, MI
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.
