Cases 101 - 110 of 346
James v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al
as 8:2019cv01137
Defendant:
Synovus Bank, Trans Union, LLC, Experian Information Solutions, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Richard James
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Richard Jackson v. United States
as 19-1637
Respondent / Appellee:
United States of America
Petitioner / Appellant:
Richard James Jackson
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2019cv00250
Undetermined:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Hart et al v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
as 1:2018cv12353
Plaintiff:
Lawrence Hoffman, Eslyn Jeffrey, Frederick Jimenez and others
Defendant:
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1605 A
(PC) Welk v. California Department of Corrections
as 2:2018cv03008
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections
Plaintiff:
Richard James Welk
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 9:2018cv00181
Debtor In Possession:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Trustee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
In Re:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Doran v. Minnesota Life Insurance Company
as 3:2018cv02530
Defendant:
Minnesota Life Insurance Company
Plaintiff:
Richard James Doran
Undetermined:
ADR Provider
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Johnson v. Angelina County D.A. Office et al
as 2:2018cv00336
Defendant:
Angelina County D.A., Court of Criminal Appeals, Angelina County Defense Attorney Winfred III and others
Plaintiff:
Richard James Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richard Johnson v. Richardson
as 18-11006
Petitioner - Appellant:
RICHARD JAMES JOHNSON
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN RICHARDSON
Johnson v. Lafavers et al
as 7:2018cv00112
Defendant:
R Gonzales, M Moberley and J W Lafavers
Plaintiff:
R James Johnson and Richard James Johnson
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.
