Cases 31 - 40 of 135
MAYES v. MITCHELL
as 3:2023cv00182
Plaintiff:
KENNETH Q. MAYES
Defendant:
DAN MITCHELL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mayes v. L'Oreal USA, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv15020
Plaintiff:
Kristen Mayes
Defendant:
L'Oreal USA, Inc., L'Oreal USA Products, Inc., Godrej SON Holdings, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Mayes v. Beauty Bell Enterprises LLC et al
as 1:2023cv06593
Plaintiff:
Maxie Mayes
Defendant:
Beauty Bell Enterprises LLC, House of Cheatham LLC, LOreal USA, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Greenlee v. Carter, et al
as 3:2023cv00788
Plaintiff:
Timothy Greenlee
Defendant:
Robert Carter, Christina Reagle, Warden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BRADLEY v. KOSATEK et al
as 2:2023cv00374
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE C. BRADLEY
Defendant:
KOSATEK, CHESTERFIELD and MAYES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00472
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Mayes v. Kijakazi
as 1:2023cv00783
Plaintiff:
Michelle Mayes
Defendant:
Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi and Kilolo Kijakazi
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
BRADLEY v. WARDEN et al
as 2:2022cv00524
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE C. BRADLEY
Defendant:
WARDEN, HALL, PIGG and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nesmith et al v. Star Freight LLC
as 2:2022cv00287
Plaintiff:
Ronald Nesmith, Terry Crosby and Richard Maye
Defendant:
Star Freight LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Bradley v. Mayes et al
as 1:2022cv04610
Plaintiff:
Deandre Bradley
Defendant:
L. Mayes, John Doe and City Of Chicago Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
