Cases 1 - 10 of 20
Diehl et al v. Landmark Recovery of Carmel LLC
as 3:2023cv00863
Plaintiff:
Suzanne Diehl, Tylor Young, April McElroy and others
Defendant:
Landmark Recovery of Carmel LLC
Not Classified By Court:
Richard F McDevitt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Shreve v. Syngenta AG et al
as 3:2023pq00290
Special Master:
Randi Ellis
Plaintiff:
James Shreve
Defendant:
Syngenta AG, Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC and Does 1 through 60, Inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Clervrain v. Holcomb et al
as 3:2022cv00278
Plaintiff:
Manetirony Clervrain
Defendant:
Eric Holcomb, Suzanne Crouch, Holli Sullivan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Winfrey-Bey v. Burle et al
as 3:2021cv03235
Plaintiff:
Albert Winfrey-Bey
Defendant:
Amy Burle, Jon Fatheree, David Stock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Winfrey-Bey v. Burle et al
as 3:2021cv00889
Plaintiff:
Albert Winfrey-Bey
Defendant:
Amy Burle, Jon Fatheree, David Stock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bolden v. Shreve et al
as 3:2021cv00106
Defendant:
Lt. Shreve, Dulle, C/O Krebs and others
Plaintiff:
Nolan D. Bolden
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LONG et al v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS et al
as 1:2019cv02603
Defendant:
SUSIE CORDI, JOSEPH SIMPSON, ZACH ADAMS and others
Plaintiff:
BOBBY RAY LONG
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Sullivan et al
as 3:2018cv03270
Defendant:
Anthony E Sullivan, Kess Roberson, Daniel E Shreve and others
Plaintiff:
Jerry Williams, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harris v. Carlock et al
as 3:2017cv03307
Plaintiff:
Johnny Harris
Defendant:
. Carlock, . Zumwalt, D Shreve and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv09488
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 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.
