Cases 1 - 10 of 7,362
Rodriguez v. Stevenson et al
as 1:2024cv00571
Plaintiff:
Matthew Rodriguez
Defendant:
FNU Stevenson, FNU Brown and FNU Horton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Scott v. Georgia Department of Public Safety et al
as 1:2024cv02449
Plaintiff:
Celesta Scott
Defendant:
Georgia Department of Public Safety, Lt. Charles Chapeau, TFC David Kraeling and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gakuba v. Maryland State Police et al
as 1:2024cv01573
Plaintiff:
Peter Gakuba
Defendant:
Maryland State Police, Maryland Parole and Probation Dept., David Horton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 dp Civil Right Denial of Due Process
Horton v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2024cv02015
Plaintiff:
Donna Horton
Defendant:
3M Company and Arizant Healthcare, Inc.
Salas v. Horton, et al
as 24-2084
Petitioner:
PAUL STEPHEN SALAS
Respondent:
VINCENT HORTON, Warden and HECTOR BALDERAS, Attorney General of the State of New Mexico
Seagen Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.
as 24-1878
Appellant:
SEAGEN INC.
Defendant / Appellee:
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. and ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP
Horton #092674 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2024cv01300
Petitioner:
Dwayne Thomas Horton
Respondent:
Ryan Thornell and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Terry Brooks v. Heidi Washington, et al
as 24-1458
Plaintiff:
TERRY DARCEL BROOKS
Defendant:
DIRECTOR HEIDI E. WASHINGTON, CONNIE HORTON, Warden, CAPTAIN GIERKE, Corrections Officer, Shift Command and others
Horton v. Holzapfel
as 5:2024cv00263
Petitioner:
Mandrell Horton
Respondent:
Warden W. Holzapfel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Copeland v. Quality Care Senior Sitting Services, LLC et al
as 4:2024cv00133
Plaintiff:
Randa Copeland
Defendant:
Quality Care Senior Sitting Services, LLC and Dorothy Horton
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
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.
