Cases 1 - 10 of 22
Thomas Kuna-(Jacob) v. State of Illinois
as 22-1394
Plaintiff / Appellant:
THOMAS JAMES KUNA-(JACOB)
Defendant / Appellee:
STATE OF ILLINOIS and JESSE WHITE, Secretary of State
Harvey Cantrell v. Jesse White
as 21-1823
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HARVEY D. CANTRELL
Defendant / Appellee:
JESSE WHITE, Secretary of State
Committee for the Illinois Dem, et al v. Jesse White, et al
as 20-1801
Plaintiff / Appellant:
COMMITTEE FOR THE ILLINOIS DEMOCRACY AMENDMENT, DORIS DAVENPORT, JACKSON PALLER and others
Defendant / Appellee:
KATHERINE O'BRIEN, DEVON REID, in his official capacity as the Evanston City Clerk, JESSE WHITE, in his official capacity as Illinois Secretary of State and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 17-3269
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Harvey Cantrell v. Jesse White
as 16-3866
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HARVEY D. CANTRELL
Defendant - Appellee:
JESSE WHITE, Secretary of State
Randal Curtis v. Jesse White, et al
as 16-3747
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RANDAL CURTIS
Defendant - Appellee:
JESSE WHITE, Secretary of State of Illinois, SECRETARY OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS and STATE OF ILLINOIS
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-2338
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Randal Curtis v. Jesse White, et al
as 15-2073
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RANDAL CURTIS
Defendant - Appellee:
JESSE WHITE, Secretary of State and SECRETARY OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
Randal Curtis v. Jesse White, et al
as 15-2074
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RANDAL CURTIS
Defendant - Appellee:
JESSE WHITE, Secretary of State and SECRETARY OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
Randal Curtis v. Jesse White, et al
as 15-1983
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RANDAL CURTIS
Defendant - Appellee:
JESSE WHITE and SECRETARY OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
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.
