Cases 81 - 90 of 248
Hooper et al v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P.
as 5:2018cv00151
Plaintiff:
Yonnette Hooper , Martin Emanuel and Makini Hooper
Defendant:
Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Marlowe v. LeBlanc et al
as 3:2018cv00063
Defendant:
Unknown Campbell, Elizabeth Gauthreaux, Pam Hearn and others
Plaintiff:
Chris Marlowe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv00579
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Bently et al v. Williams et al
as 3:2018cv00003
Plaintiff:
Daniel Bently, Jacob Brown, Charles Brady and others
Defendant:
Dean Williams, Jeff Edwards and Kate Burkhart
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Green v. William (PLR1)
as 1:2017cv00266
Plaintiff:
Harry Louis Green
Defendant:
Lara William, BB & T Bank, Region Bank and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 3001
Dennis Hooper v. North Bend City/Coos-Curry, et al
as 17-35680
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DENNIS RUSSELL HOOPER
Defendant - Appellee:
NORTH BEND CITY/COOS-CURRY HOUSING AUTHORITY, LISA LUCERO, in her official capacity and as an individual and LARRY SCARBROUGH, in his official capacity and as an individual
Dennis Hooper v. USHUD, et al
as 17-35674
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DENNIS RUSSELL HOOPER
Defendant - Appellee:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT and COOS-CURRY HOUSING AUTHORITY
Dennis Hooper v. USHUD, et al
as 17-35630
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DENNIS RUSSELL HOOPER
Defendant - Appellee:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT and COOS-CURRY HOUSING AUTHORITY
Dennis Hooper v. USHUD, et al
as 17-35629
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DENNIS RUSSELL HOOPER
Defendant - Appellee:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT and COOS-CURRY HOUSING AUTHORITY
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2017cv03442
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
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.
