Cases 11 - 20 of 3,074
Gecsi v. United States of America
as 7:2024cv00444
Plaintiff:
Robert Gecsi
Defendant:
United States of America
Interested Party:
Torts Branch USDOJ
Hart v. FBI et al
as 3:2024cv00500
Plaintiff:
Brandon Hart
Defendant:
FBI and Robert M. DeWitt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Riley v. United States of America
as 7:2024cv00435
Plaintiff:
John Robert Morgan
Defendant:
United States of America
Fitch et al v. Tyrrell County Board of Commissioners et al
as 2:2024cv00026
Plaintiff:
Joyce Sykes Fitch, Mark Mixon, Sherryreed Robinson and others
Defendant:
Tyrrell County Board of Commissioners, Nathan Everett, Nina Griswell and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
KELLY v. USA
as 1:2024cv00427
Petitioner:
JAKE ROBERT KELLY
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
KING v. ALAMANCE DISTRICT ATTORNEY et al
as 1:2024cv00426
Petitioner:
ROBERT CHARLES ANTHONY KING
Respondent:
ALAMANCE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SEAN BOONE, MAGGIE BREWER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Frost, et al v. Hilliard Law, et al
as 1:2024cv00149
Plaintiff:
Kristina Rene Frost, GARY ALLEN MAYS, JR., ESTATE OF SHAWNA RENE MAYS and others
Defendant:
HILLIARD LAW, Hilliard Martinez Gonzales, LLP, ROBERT CARL HILLIARD and others
Haynes v. Quinn et al
as 5:2024cv00125
Defendant:
FNU Starowicz, FNU Quinn, FNU Lay and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Jeremy Haynes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00399
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Moseley v. United States of America
as 7:2024cv00405
Plaintiff:
Robert Daniel Moseley
Defendant:
United States of America
Interested Party:
Torts Branch USDOJ
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.
