Cases 11 - 20 of 127
Annamalai v. Simpkins et al
as 3:2022cv02576
Plaintiff:
Annamalai Annamalai and Swamiji Sri Selvam Siddhar
Defendant:
Nathan Simpkins, Gary Burgess, Daniel Sproul and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rojas v. Dream Big Pac et al
as 1:2022cv05638
Plaintiff:
Jorge Alejandro Rojas
Defendant:
Dream Big Pac and Owen Burgess
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Annamalai v. Sproul et al
as 3:2022cv01541
Plaintiff:
Annamalai Annamalai and Swamiji Sri Selvam Siddhar
Defendant:
Daniel Sproul, Nathan Simpkins, Gary Burgess and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Burgess v. USA
as 3:2022cv01161
Petitioner:
Albert C. Burgess
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Burgess et al v. Syngenta AG et al
as 3:2022pq00573
Special Master:
Randi Ellis
Plaintiff:
Terry Burgess and Paula Burgess Turney
Defendant:
Syngenta AG, Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC and Chevron U.S.A. Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Burgess v. Syngenta AG et al
as 3:2022pq00513
Special Master:
Randi Ellis
Plaintiff:
Derl E. Burgess
Defendant:
Syngenta AG, Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC and Chevron U.S.A. Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Burgess v. Sproul et al
as 3:2022cv00231
Petitioner:
Albert C. Burgess, Jr.
Respondent:
Dan Sproul and USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Burgess v. USA
as 3:2021cv01716
Petitioner:
Albert C. Burgess, Jr.
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Nabors v. Burgess et al
as 1:2021cv01343
Plaintiff:
Deonta Nabors
Defendant:
. Burgess, . Blackwell and . Rebecca
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Burgess v. USA
as 3:2021cv01332
Petitioner:
Albert C. Burgess, Jr.
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
