Cases 41 - 50 of 106
Jones v. United States Army Reserve
as 2:2017cv01777
Plaintiff:
Vena Lynn Jones
Defendant:
United States Army Reserve
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BERTUCCIO v. CHRISTOPHER et al
as 1:2017cv00774
Plaintiff:
TINA BERTUCCIO
Defendant:
DON CHRISTOPHER, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, UNITED STATES ARMY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gamble v. Penn-Dot et al
as 1:2017cv00358
Plaintiff:
Wayne Gamble
Defendant:
Penn-Dot, Del-Dot Of Delaware, Military Police of the United States of America and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Hagedorn v. Obama et al
as 2:2016cv16919
Plaintiff:
Brian Albert Hagedorn
Defendant:
Barack Obama, Joseph F. Dunford, Eric Fanning and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Thomas v. United States Army et al
as 7:2016cv01760
Plaintiff:
Lakisha Renee Thomas
Defendant:
United States Army and Watergate Apartments
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
OBERUCH v. THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY et al
as 3:2016cv06753
Plaintiff:
JOHN OBERUCH, JR.
Defendant:
THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. SECRETARY OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY
as 2:2016cv01498
Plaintiff:
DEWITT THOMAS SMITH, JR.
Defendant:
SECRETARY OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sigfrid Bradshaw v. United States Army
as 16-16025
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SIGFRID N. BRADSHAW
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES ARMY, Recruiting, Valdosta
Marshall Hiles v. Army Review Board Agency, et al
as 16-3996
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARSHALL G. HILES, individually and on behalf of his estate and heirs of Charles D. Hiles
Defendant - Appellee:
ARMY REVIEW BOARD AGENCY, Board for Correction of Military Records, VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATES ARMY and others
Danny Caesar v. U S ARMY, et al
as 16-16505
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DANNY LEE CAESAR
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES ARMY and BOARD OF THE CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
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.
