Cases
Cases 91 - 100 of 7,782
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv05684
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Jones v. Roseville Police Department et al
as 1:2024cv11724
Defendant: Jason Otto, Taylor Patrick, Trewhella and others
Plaintiff: Lamar A. Jones
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Damian-Lamar v. GSA et al
as 2:2024cv00838
Defendant: US Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, US Marshals Service and GSA
Plaintiff: Damian-Lamar
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hogan v. Boston et al
as 1:2024cv02985
Plaintiff: Ricky Lamar Hogan
Defendant: Jonathan C. Peters, DeKalb County Superior Court, Robert E. Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2024cv05657
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Matthews v. QCHC et al
as 5:2024cv00870
Defendant: QCHC and Page
Plaintiff: Gerald Lamar Matthews
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adam Douglas, et al
as 24-1556
Petitioner: In re: KALVIN LAMAR WASHINGTON
Respondent: ADAM DOUGLAS
Cooley v. Lamar
as 1:2024cv00215
Respondent: David Lamar
Petitioner: Jason Cooley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Whatley v. Campbell
as 1:2024cv05345
Respondent: Steven Campbell
Petitioner: Lamar Edward Whatley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pitts v. Forrest County, et al
as 2:2024cv00092
Defendant: Shane Lamar Boyle, Forrest County, Officer Jason Reed and others
Plaintiff: Daniel Dewitt Pitts
Interested Party: Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

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.


Why Is My Information Online?