Cases 41 - 50 of 412
Shaw v. Loften
as 6:2022cv06065
Plaintiff:
Jeffery Wayne Shaw
Defendant:
Deputy Loften
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2022cv00600
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Porter & Shaw Investments, LLC et al
as 4:2022cv03139
Plaintiff:
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.
Defendant:
Porter & Shaw Investments, LLC doing business as 12th Street Pub, Tanya Porter and Joseph Shaw
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 553 Unauthorized reception of cable service
Rajni Shaw v. State of Minnesota
as 22-2489
Petitioner:
Rajni Shaw
Respondent:
State of Minnesota, Corporate Courts
Damota v. Shaw et al
as 3:2022cv05036
Plaintiff:
Tiffany Damota
Defendant:
Barton Co. Sheriff L. Mitchell Shaw, Deputy Antonio Azua and Barton Cty Sheriff John Simpson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Shaw v. Social Security Administration
as 4:2022cv00483
Plaintiff:
Michelle E Shaw
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Shaw v. Loften
as 6:2022cv06044
Plaintiff:
Jeffery Wayne Shaw
Defendant:
Deputy Loften
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shaw v. Wasko et al
as 4:2022cv04054
Plaintiff:
James Elmer Shaw
Defendant:
Kelly Wasko, Dan Sullivan, Brent Fluke and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Klein et al v. City of Sedalia, Missouri et al
as 2:2022cv04049
Plaintiff:
Jason R. Klein and James Kohrs
Defendant:
City of Sedalia, Missouri, Kelvin Shaw, Pettis County, Missouri and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shaw v. N.D.S.P.
as 1:2022cv00047
Petitioner:
Delvin Lamont Shaw
Respondent:
N.D.S.P.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
