Cases 1 - 8 of 8
STONE et al v. DESANTIS et al
as 4:2020cv00568
Defendant:
ASHLEY MOODY, RONALD DESANTIS, CHRISTOPHER WRAY and others
Plaintiff:
BARBARA STONE, PATTY REID, MARIA GLORIA ROMERO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NIELSEN et al v. DESANTIS et al
as 4:2020cv00236
Defendant:
GLENDA B. WILLIAMS, ASHLEY MOODY, SHARON CHASON and others
Plaintiff:
MORGAN OUTLAW, FLORIDA ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED AMERICANS, RAY DAVIS and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
CELCIO EDUARDO ROMERO, PAULINA HERNANDEZ MORALES, BIANCA MARIA BAEZ and others
Intervenor Defendant:
REPUBLICAN PARTY OF FLORIDA, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, NAITONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE and others
Intervenor:
CARL F MCCOY, JAMES K KRACHT, DOUGLAS E HALL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WILLIAMS et al v. DESANTIS et al
as 1:2020cv00067
Plaintiff:
Williams, KATHLEEN WINTERS, TERRIAYNA SPILLMAN and others
Defendant:
DESANTIS, FLORIDA ELECTIONS CANVASSING COMMISSION, LAUREL M LEE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
EL v. SCHWEINHART
as 3:2017cv00022
Plaintiff:
RAVENGRACE MORI EL
Defendant:
NORTH OKALOOSA MEDICAL CENTER, MARTIN G SCHWEINHART, JAMES W DOUCETTE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. AUTOFLEX LLC et al
as 1:2015cv00141
Plaintiff:
BRANDON SMITH
Defendant:
AUTOFLEX LLC and GOVINDA ROMERO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
JONES v. CAMPBELL et al
as 4:2012cv00458
Plaintiff:
DARYL K JONES
Defendant:
LARRY CAMPBELL, CORIZON HEALTH INC, HAU THIEN HUYHN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROMERO v. WATSON et al
as 1:2008cv00216
Plaintiff:
GOVINDA ROMERO
Defendant:
CLOVIS WATSON, JR, GENE PATTON and CITY OF ALACHUA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
ROMERO v. WATSON et al
as 1:2008cv00217
Plaintiff:
GOVINDA ROMERO
Defendant:
CLOVIS WATSON, JR, GENE PATTON and CITY OF ALACHUA
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
