Cases 11 - 20 of 1,672
Taylor v. State of Oregon et al
as 2:2024cv00599
Plaintiff:
Jermel Arcilicia Taylor
Defendant:
State of Oregon and Robert D. Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Deafueh Monbo v. Upper Chesapeake Medical Center, Inc.
as 24-1292
Plaintiff:
DEAFUEH MONBO and JUAHDI MONBO
Defendant:
UPPER CHESAPEAKE MEDICAL CENTER, INC., HARFORD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, INC., ESKINDER AFEWORK, individually and as an employee of Upper Chesapeake Medical Center Inc. and others
Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2024cv00278
Plaintiff:
Adrienne D. Jones
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
JONES v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2024cv00470
Petitioner:
CHARLES D. JONES
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, NICOLE W. ZICCARELLI and STEVEN PELESKY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv01028
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
JONES v. SOLITARY WATCH et al
as 4:2024cv00133
Plaintiff:
JESSIE W JONES
Defendant:
SOLITARY WATCH, DONALD J TRUMP, JOHN KIRBY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Pinellas County)
as 8:2024cv00573
Petitioner:
Larry D. Jones
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) Martinez v. Heath et al
as 2:2024cv00516
Plaintiff:
Fred Feleki Martinez
Defendant:
Heath and D. Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Jones v. East Baton Rouge et al
as 3:2024cv00109
Plaintiff:
Michael D. Jones, Jr.
Defendant:
East Baton Rouge, West Baton Rouge and Corey Felder
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
