Cases 51 - 60 of 108
Hollis v. Jeffreys et al
as 1:2020cv01971
Defendant:
John Doe #5, Rob Jeffreys, Sgt. Mayz and others
Plaintiff:
Marte Hollis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MUNDEN v. BROWN et al
as 2:2020cv00107
Defendant:
RANDALL PURCELL, RUSSELL, ANDREA STROUP and others
Plaintiff:
KEITH MUNDEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ferguson v. Balawender et al
as 1:2020cv00112
Defendant:
John Doe #4, John Doe #1, Jane Doe #5 and others
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Dean Ferguson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nance v. Doe #1 et al
as 1:2019cv07938
Defendant:
Nicholson, Bradfield, John Doe #5 and others
Plaintiff:
Ellean Nance
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HB Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-17
as 1:2019cv06363
Defendant:
Does 1-17, John Doe 5, Doe No. 15 and others
Plaintiff:
HB Productions, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
WANG et al v. CITY OF FISHERS POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 1:2019cv04042
Defendant:
SETH JOHNSON, DAVID BOHMEIER, JOHN DOE 7 and others
Plaintiff:
CHUEN HUA WANG, GUARDIAN CHUEN HUA WANG and TIAN HUEI WANG
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hunter Killer Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-20
as 1:2019cv04273
Plaintiff:
Hunter Killer Productions, Inc.
Defendant:
Does 1-20, John Doe 20, John Doe 6 and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Hunter Killer Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-16
as 1:2019cv03592
Plaintiff:
Hunter Killer Productions, Inc.
Defendant:
Does 1-16, Doe No. 13, John Doe 6 and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Clark v. United States et al
as 3:2019cv00440
Petitioner:
Sacorey Lennel Clark, Sacorey Lennel Clark Trust and Secured Party Sacorey-Lennel
Respondent:
USA, United States Department of Justice, John Doe, 3 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Hunter Killer Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-23
as 1:2019cv02922
Plaintiff:
HUNTER KILLER PRODUCTIONS, INC.
Defendant:
DOES 1-23, Doe No. 20, John Doe 6 and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
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.
