Cases 11 - 20 of 37
SMITH v. URBINA et al
as 1:2017mc01076
Plaintiff:
DAVID L. SMITH
Defendant:
RICARDO M. URBINA and TERRENCE W. BOYLE
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
SMITH v. BOYLE et al
as 1:2016cv00998
Plaintiff:
DAVID L. SMITH
Defendant:
TERRENCE W. BOYLE, MICHAEL F. EASLEY and JOHN H. BAKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PHILLIPS v. BOYLE et al
as 1:2016cv00620
Plaintiff:
OLIVER KAREEM PHILLIPS
Defendant:
TERRENCE W. BOYLE and LOUISE W. FLANAGAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BOYLE v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
as 1:2016cv00411
Plaintiff:
EDMUND BOYLE
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
BUTLER v. BOYLE et al
as 1:2016cv00335
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARD BUTLER
Defendant:
TERRENCE W. BOYLE and PAT MCCRORY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2015cv02123
Plaintiff:
DAVID L. SMITH
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TERRENCE W. BOYLE, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MIDYETTE v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2015cv01356
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH D. MIDYETTE
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TERRENCE W. BOYLE, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2015cv01201
Plaintiff:
DAVID L. SMITH
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TERRENCE W. BOYLE, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BUTLER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2015cv01027
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TERRENCE W. BOYLE, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA and others
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARD BUTLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MIDYETTE v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2015cv00869
Petitioner:
JOSEPH DIXON MIDYETTE
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TERRENCE W. BOYLE and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
