Cases 31 - 40 of 51
Booth v. Baker et al
as 4:2014cv00637
Plaintiff:
Derrick Lamont Booth
Defendant:
Ryan Baker, Marion A Humphrey and Wendell Griffin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tatum v. Mitchell et al
as 2:2013cv00151
Plaintiff:
Antwan Tatum
Defendant:
Mitchell, Phillip, Brooks and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Humphrey v. Corizon Medical Services Inc et al
as 5:2013cv00271
Plaintiff:
Marvin J Humphrey
Defendant:
Corizon Medical Services Inc, Marie Austin, Estella Bland and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dunklin et al v. Tipton et al
as 5:2013cv00056
Plaintiff:
George H Dunklin, Jr
Defendant:
Deborah Dunklin Tipton , Dunklin & Dunklin Farms Partnership , M E Black Dunklin Farms Partnership and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract
Holmes et al v. Hall et al
as 5:2013cv00007
Plaintiff:
Mandrick Holmes and Shay Humphrey
Defendant:
David Hall and K Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Winston v. Clark et al
as 5:2012cv00430
Plaintiff:
Charles A Winston
Defendant:
Yolonda Clark, Joyce Jackson, Kay Skillen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Axelson v. Corizon Medical Services Inc et al
as 5:2012cv00339
Plaintiff:
Tim Axelson
Defendant:
Corizon Medical Services Inc, Kevin Bice, J M Courtney and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Walden et al v. Humphrey et al
as 4:2012cv00190
Plaintiff:
David Walden and Dana Walden
Defendant:
Lolowana Humphrey, BME Enterprise LLC and BME LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Humphrey v. Electrolux Home Products Inc
as 4:2012cv00157
Plaintiff:
Tammie Humphrey
Defendant:
Electrolux Home Products Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Odom v. Banks et al
as 5:2011cv00260
Plaintiff:
Michael Layne Odom
Defendant:
Banks, Emsweller, Stephen Humphrey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
