Cases 11 - 20 of 7,321
Duncan v. Potter County et al
as 5:2024cv00125
Plaintiff:
James Daniel Duncan
Defendant:
Potter County, Randall County and Amarillo Potter County Police
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Alexander et al v. The 3M Company et al
as 1:2024cv04068
Defendant:
The 3M Company, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., AGC Chemicals Americas Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Bryan Alexander, Stuart Allen, Keith Aytay and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal - Suit against Federal Officer
MacDonald et al v. US Department of the Treasury et al
as 3:2024cv01265
Plaintiff:
Duncan John MacDonald and The Duncan MacDonald Family
Defendant:
US Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Daniel Werfel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Winding *RESTRICTED FILER* v. Reeves et al
as 4:2024cv00050
Plaintiff:
James C. Winding *RESTRICTED FILER*
Defendant:
Tate Reeves, Marc McClure, Lynn Fitch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Boyd v. State of South Carolina et al
as 7:2024cv03200
Plaintiff:
Latasha Monique Boyd and Latasha Boyd
Defendant:
South Carolina, State of, Spartanburg Sheriff Department, Duncan Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Cureton v. Unnamed Defendant et al
as 5:2024cv00094
Plaintiff:
Keith L. Cureton
Defendant:
Unnamed Defendant, Lower Bed Unit Restrictive Housing Officers, FNU Puckett and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Houston v. Smith et al
as 1:2024cv00934
Plaintiff:
Polica Houston
Defendant:
Damon (I) Smith, Damon Smith, Carole (I) Jennings and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Albert Anderson v. McMillian
as 24-6495
Plaintiff:
ALBERT ANDERSON
Defendant:
MCMILLIAN, Medical Provider, ERIC DYE, Warden, JEFFREY DUNCAN, Assistant Warden and others
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.
