Cases 101 - 110 of 169
Paselk v. State of Texas et al
as 4:2012cv00754
Plaintiff:
Carol Paselk
Defendant:
State of Texas, Hopkins County Texas, Hopkins County Sheriff Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
SMITH v. ASTRUE
as 1:2012cv01247
Plaintiff:
AMY SMITH
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Interested_party:
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Smith v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 2:2012cv05407
Plaintiff:
Amy Smith
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Huber, Jr v. State Of Ohio et al
as 3:2012cv00288
Plaintiff:
Joseph W Huber, Jr
Defendant:
State Of Ohio, Amy Smith and Warden of Chillicothe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Amy Smith v. Mortgage Electronic, et al
as 12-14333
Plaintiff - Appellant:
AMY SMITH
Defendant - Appellee:
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., MERSCORP, INC. and others
Smith v. American Medical Systems Inc.
as 1:2012cv01040
Plaintiff:
Amy Smith
Defendant:
American Medical Systems Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Darren Simmons v. Shelley Stoke
as 12-7322
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARREN SIMMONS
Defendant - Appellee:
ROLAND MCFADDEN, Warden, ROBIN CHAVIS, AMY SMITH, RN Nurse and others
Defendant:
HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS, ROBERT SCHULZE, JR., MD, JENNIFER A. FELDMAN, MD and others
Davis v. Clayton et al
as 3:2012cv00593
Plaintiff:
Eric Davis
Defendant:
Victoria Clayton, Amy Smith and Roman McFadden
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Mortgage Electronic et al
as 1:2011cv04287
Plaintiff:
Amy Smith
Defendant:
Mortgage Electronic, MERS Registration Systems, Inc., Merscorp and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1444
Davis v. Clayton et al
as 3:2011cv03071
Plaintiff:
Eric Davis
Defendant:
Victoria Clayton, Willie Eagleton, Robin Chavis 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.
