Cases 31 - 40 of 76
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2019cv01307
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Jose Fierro v. Keith Smith, et al
as 19-16786
Defendant:
M. ESPINOZA, C.O. IV/ Grievance Coordinator at Central Unit - Florence, MALACHINSKI, MOLERA, C.O. II and others
Defendant / Appellee:
L. FORESTER, D.W., KEITH SMITH, Security Operations Administrator at Phoenix Division Director's Office, PANANN DAYS and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JOSE ABEL FIERRO
Paul Cline, et al v. Dart Transit Company, et al
as 19-3375
Defendant / Appellee:
DART TRANSIT COMPANY and SUSAN PRIEST RICHLAK, Administrator of the Estate of Richard M. Thompson, Jr., deceased
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PAUL CLINE and JEANINE CLINE
Thompson v. U.S. Justice Department
as 4:2019cv00033
Plaintiff:
David M. Thompson
Defendant:
U.S. Justice Department
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Frederick Leonard v. M. Thompson, et al
as 19-15524
Defendant / Appellee:
S. CLEMENTE and M. THOMPSON
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FREDERICK E. LEONARD
Defendant:
J. METZGER
Rosenfeld et al v. Lenich et al
as 1:2018cv06720
Defendant:
Lu-Shawn M. Thompson, Mark Feldman, Robert Kenavan and others
Plaintiff:
Danielle Rosenfeld and Vincent Garcia
Hug et al v. United States of America
as 3:2018cv05862
Plaintiff:
Justin L Hug, Terry L Carver and Leo M Thompson
Defendant:
United States and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 925 A
Richard Thompson v. Jefferson Sessions III
as 18-2185
Petitioner:
RICHARD M. THOMPSON
Respondent:
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General of the United States
Thompson v. Paypal, Inc. d/b/a XOOM
as 5:2017cv06459
Plaintiff:
Brandon M. Thompson
Defendant:
Paypal, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227
United States of America v. Steven M. Thompson
as 5:2017cv02016
Defendant:
Steven M. Thompson
Plaintiff:
United States of America
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.
