Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Vincent Cannady v. State of Missouri, et al
as 21-1460
Defendant / Appellee:
John Doe, University of Missouri System Office of Counsel, Jane Doe and others
Defendant:
Willis Doss, Applications Manager, Michael Garvin, Senior EEC Investigator, Aaron Hart, Human Resources Director and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Vincent Cannady
Vincent Cannady v. State of Missouri, et al
as 20-3272
Defendant / Appellee:
John Doe, University of Missouri System Office of Counsel, Jane Doe and others
Defendant:
Willis Doss, Applications Manager, Michael Garvin, Senior EEC Investigator, Aaron Hart, Human Resources Director and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Vincent Cannady
Vincent Cannady v. State of Missouri, et al
as 20-1693
Defendant / Appellee:
Aaron Hart, Human Resources Director, University of Missouri System Office of Counsel, Mel Tyler, Vice Chancellor - Director of Student Affairs and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Vincent Cannady
Vincent Cannady v. State of Missouri, et al
as 20-1408
Defendant / Appellee:
Aaron Hart, Human Resources Director, University of Missouri System Office of Counsel, Mel Tyler, Vice Chancellor - Director of Student Affairs and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Vincent Cannady
Timothy Ashford, et al v. Office for Counsel for DSPLN, et al
as 19-2618
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Timothy L. Ashford, PC LLO and Timothy L. Ashford
Defendant / Appellee:
John Does, 1-100, Mark Alan Weber, in his official capacity and his individual capacity, Office for Counsel for Discipline and others
Timothy L. Ashford, PC LLO et al v. Office for Counsel for Discipline et al
as 8:2019cv00243
Defendant:
John Does 1-100, Mark A. Weber, Office for Counsel for Discipline and others
Plaintiff:
Timothy L. Ashford, PC LLO and Timothy L. Ashford
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2013cv02514
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
