Cases 91 - 100 of 317
CABINESS v. PA ATTORNEY GENERAL et al
as 2:2018cv01229
Petitioner:
CHARLES ROBERT CABINESS
Respondent:
MARK CAPOZZA, PA ATTORNEY GENERAL and DISTRICT ATTORNEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Dunn v. Roberts et al
as 3:2018cv00523
Defendant:
Louisville Metro Police Department, Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government and Charles Roberts
Plaintiff:
Gary Allen Dunn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Robert v. The Central Intelligence Agenc
as 18-1575
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Charles Robert, II, AKA Snowflake 5391
Defendant - Appellee:
Central Intelligence Agency and Department of Justice
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv02209
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Nguyen v. Presiding Judge of 120th Judicial District et al
as 3:2018cv00004
Plaintiff:
Minh Nguyen
Respondent:
Presiding Judge of 120th Judicial District
Defendant:
Charles Roberts
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Chmura v. Kurvin et al
as 3:2017cv02163
Plaintiff:
Linda Lan Chmura
Defendant:
Stephen H. Kurvin, Hodges, Avrutis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Davis et al
as 5:2017cv00187
Plaintiff:
Rodney Smith
Defendant:
Charles Aaron Davis , James Beeler , Troy Belt and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Charles Morris, III v. Phil Grime
as 17-7437
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CHARLES ROBERT MORRIS, III
Defendant - Appellee:
PHIL GRIME, Colonel-Superintendent, SCOTT BAIRD, Assistant Superintendent and MS. HALL, Case Manager of C-Side Cluster
Charles Morris, III v. Mental Health
as 17-7436
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CHARLES ROBERT MORRIS, III
Defendant - Appellee:
MENTAL HEALTH, MS. HALL, Case Manager and SUPERINTENDENT
Steeprow v. Property & Casualty Insurance Company of Hartford et al
as 6:2017cv01774
Plaintiff:
Kenneth G. Steeprow
Defendant:
Property & Casualty Insurance Company of Hartford, GEICO, Vincent Torpy, Jr. 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.
