Cases 51 - 60 of 62
Chambliss v. Mendez et al
as 1:2011cv02514
Plaintiff:
Douglas Chambliss
Defendant:
Julie Mendez , Hall James and City Of Chicago
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson et al v. Riley et al
as 7:2010cv02067
Plaintiff:
William Johnson , Annie Pearl Leftwich , Bobbie Morgan and others
Defendant:
Bob Riley and John M Tyson, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1973
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv00077
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Chambliss v. Buckner et al
as 3:2010cv00213
Plaintiff:
Dexter A. Chambliss
Defendant:
Nancy T. Buckner, Marsha S. Hanks and Tallapoosa County Department of Human Resources
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Taylor v. Obama et al
as 3:2009cv01952
Plaintiff:
Matthew Taylor
Defendant:
Barack Obama, George W. Bush, George H. W. Bush and others
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv00725
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Lewis v. City Council of Petersburg, Virginia et al
as 3:2009cv00568
Plaintiff:
Orville Lewis, Jr.
Defendant:
City Council of Petersburg, Virginia, David Canada, John Dixon, III and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Right Denial of Due Process
Seaman v. Chambliss et al
as 4:2008cv00779
Plaintiff:
Kerry Seaman and Kerry Seaman
Defendant:
Scott Chambliss, Dan Yancey, Rodney Ray and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Martinez v. Denny's, Inc. et al
as 2:2008cv02485
Plaintiff:
Tony Martinez
Defendant:
Denny's, Inc. and Eva Gertrude Chambliss
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
NOT USED
as 2:2008cv01000
Plaintiff:
Raymond Padilla
Defendant:
State of Nevada in rel. The Nevada Department of Corrections, Jim Gibbons, Kenny Guinn and others
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.
