Cases 31 - 40 of 84
BANKS v. UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE et al
as 2:2015cv00127
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK BANKS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE, DIRECTOR, UNITED STATES MARSHAL, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00037
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Banks et al v. New York Police Department et al
as 2:2015cv00151
Defendant:
Ronnie Abrams, Jessica Albert, Harold Baer and others
Plaintiff:
Frederick Banks and Kenneth Posner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00099
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Hanic v. Bureau of Indian Affairs et al
as 9:2014cv00216
Plaintiff:
Daniel Hanic
Defendant:
Bureau of Indian Affairs and Department of the Interior
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2014cv03143
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Passons v. Osage Nation Government et al
as 4:2014cv00281
Plaintiff:
Russell Allen Passons
Defendant:
Osage Nation Government, Department of the Interior, Secretary of the Interior and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Phillips v. Salt River Police Department et al
as 2:2014cv01036
Petitioner:
Brian G Phillips
Respondent:
Salt River Police Department, Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, Salt River Casino and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
McCovey v. Bureau of Indian Affairs et al
as 3:2014cv01645
Plaintiff:
William McCovey, III
Defendant:
Bureau of Indian Affairs and Yurok Tribe of California
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Banks v. CCA Corporate Office et al
as 4:2013cv02721
Plaintiff:
Frederick Banks
Defendant:
CCA Corporate Office, Michael Pugh, CCA NEOCC and others
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.
