Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Kalim Muhammad v. Wendy's of Bowling Green, Inc., et al
as 23-14126
Plaintiff:
KALIM A.R. MUHAMMAD
Defendant:
WENDY'S OF BOWLING GREEN, INC., COWIN KNOWLES, CIARA DENNIS and others
Rakeem Harris v. Chris Renken, et al
as 23-2742
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RAKEEM HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
CHRIS RENKEN, Police Officer, NATHAN HAYNES, Police Officer, DAKOTA DEMOSS, Police Officer and others
Harris v. Renken et al
as 1:2023cv01213
Plaintiff:
Rakeem Harris
Defendant:
Chris Renken, Nathan Haynes, Dakota Demoss and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Muhammad et al v. Wendy's of Bowling Green, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv00020
Plaintiff:
Kalim A. R. Muhammad and Karima Lakssir Muhammad
Defendant:
Wendy's of Bowling Green, Inc., Cowin Knowles, Ciara Dennis and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Harris v. Brown et al
as 3:2021cv01332
Defendant:
Dakota Demoss, Sheriffs Office Richland Parish, George Harper and others
Plaintiff:
Antonio Harris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Harris v. Brown et al
as 6:2021cv01332
Defendant:
Dakota Demoss, Richland Parish Detention Center, George Harper and others
Plaintiff:
Antonio Harris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Simmons v. The State of Texas et al
as 5:2020cv01006
Defendant:
The State of Texas, Norma Ferguson, Susan Estringel and others
Plaintiff:
Ryan David Simmons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Greene v. Demoss et al
as 3:2020cv00578
Plaintiff:
Tayla Greene
Defendant:
Dakota Demoss, Floyd McElroy, John Clary and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WANG v. PALMER et al
as 4:2019cv00203
Defendant:
JEFFERY KENNEDY, JOHN SMITH, MARK PALMER and others
Plaintiff:
TIAN HUEI WANG
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WANG v. PALMER et al
as 1:2019cv03988
Defendant:
JEFFERY KENNEDY, JOHN SMITH, MARK PALMER and others
Plaintiff:
TIAN HUEI WANG
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.
