Cases 31 - 40 of 45
Daniels et al v. The Boeing Company
as 3:2013cv05679
Defendant:
The Boeing Company , John and Jane Doe and John Doe Two Company
Plaintiff:
Clifford C Daniels and Eileen N Daniels
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
John Folsom v. Indymac Bancorp, Inc. et al
as 2:2008cv03812
Plaintiff:
Michael B Coady, Robert C. Daniels, John Folsom and others
Objector:
Scott Van Dellen
Defendant:
Ernst & Young LLP, Indymac Bancorp, Inc., A. Scott Keys and others
Unknown:
Michael C Tu, Ramzi Abadou, Teodora Manolova and others
Movant:
Local 731 Group
Trustee:
Alfred H. Siegel
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78 m(a) Securities Exchange Act
Mary C Daniel v. Carolyn W Colvin
as 5:2013cv00448
Defendant:
Carolyn W Colvin
Plaintiff:
Mary C Daniel
Daniels v. Harrell et al
as 4:2012cv02546
Plaintiff:
Scott C. Daniels
Defendant:
Frank (Francis) Harrell and City of San Francisco
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Daniels v. Apker
as 4:2012cv00385
Petitioner:
Robert C Daniels
Respondent:
Craig Apker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
McCowan v. Kendall et al
as 2:2011cv02071
Plaintiff:
Marlon Corwin McCowan
Defendant:
Dennis Kendall, Jim Taylor, Charles L Ryan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv00361
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0157
Neal v. Daniels et al
as 1:2011cv01361
Petitioner:
Denard Darnell Neal
Respondent:
United States Penitentiary Atwater , Cassandra Harris , Kimberly Kodger and others
Defendant:
C. Daniels
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Joshua Todd Woolridge v. C Daniel Faulhaber
as 5:2010cv01116
Defendant:
C Daniel Faulhaber and C Daniel Faulhaber
Plaintiff:
Joshua Todd Woolridge
Leon C Daniel v. County of Riverside et al
as 5:2010cv00262
Defendant:
Jonetta Anderson, County of Riverside, Jensen and others
Plaintiff:
Leon C Daniel
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.
