Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Athalonz, LLC v. Under Armour, Inc.
as 3:2023mc80324
Plaintiff:
Athalonz, LLC
Defendant:
Under Armour, Inc.
Not Classified By Court:
Wardell Stephen Curry, II
Barth v. Mabry Carlton Ranch, Inc et al
as 5:2020cv09288
Defendant:
Longino Ranch, Inc., Mabry Carlton Ranch, Inc, Eric Sutton and others
Plaintiff:
John S Barth and John Barth
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964
Under Armour, Inc. v. Battle Fashions, Inc. et al
as 3:2018mc80117
Plaintiff:
Under Armour, Inc.
Undetermined:
Wardell Stephen Curry, II
Defendant:
Battle Fashions, Inc. and Kelsey Battle
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Curry v. Yelp Inc. et al
as 3:2014cv03547
Plaintiff:
Joseph Curry
Defendant:
Yelp Inc., Jeremy Stoppelman, Robert J. Krolik and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Dairy et al v. Bonham
as 3:2013cv01518
Plaintiff:
Ralph Dairy , Lynette Dairy , Joseph Spier and others
Defendant:
Charlton Bonham
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Curry v. City of Oakland et al
as 4:2008cv03695
Plaintiff:
Darrell Curry
Defendant:
City of Oakland , Wayne Tucker , S. Barre and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
John-Charles v. Abanico et al
as 4:2007cv05786
Plaintiff:
Curtis M. John-Charles
Defendant:
E. Abanico, L. Rayasa, Ben Curry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Curry
as 5:2007cv02610
Petitioner:
Roosevelt Johnson
Respondent:
B. Curry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Curry v. Hansen Medical, Inc. et al
as 5:2009cv05094
Plaintiff:
Robert Curry and Robert Curry
Defendant:
Hansen Medical, Inc., Frederic H. Moll and Steven M. Van Dick
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78 m(a) Securities Exchange Act
Grimes v. Currie's Automotive, Inc. et al
as 4:2007mc80159
Plaintiff:
Jerome L. Grimes
Defendant:
Currie's Automotive, Inc., Chevron Gas Station, Karina Bellow and others
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.
