Cases 11 - 20 of 32
Hooker v. Hooker
as 1:2022cv02999
Petitioner:
Jaclynn Hooker
Respondent:
Nathaniel Hooker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Hooker v. Kijakazi
as 1:2021cv04216
Plaintiff:
Julius A. Hooker
Defendant:
Acting Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi and Kilolo Kijakazi
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205
Hooker v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 3:2021cv03118
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff:
Helen Louise Hooker
Interested Party:
CSS-Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Potter et al v. Madigan et al
as 1:2020cv04675
Plaintiff:
Ms Robin Hawkins, Raymond Simpson, Anne Potter and others
Defendant:
Jay Doherty, Michael Madigan, Michael McClain and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
Abdul-Ghafoor, et al v. Professional Transportation, Inc. et al
as 3:2017cv01105
Plaintiff:
Yuwsuf Abdul-Ghafoor, Rhoda Kathleen Blair, Linda Cohill and others
Defendant:
Professional Transportation, Inc. and Ronald D. Romain
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 5
Hooker v. Crown Asset Management, LLC
as 1:2017cv03709
Plaintiff:
Ruth Hooker
Defendant:
Crown Asset Management, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Hooker v. Berryhill
as 3:2017cv50042
Plaintiff:
Richard R. Hooker
Defendant:
Nancy A. Berryhill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205
Johnson v. Schuyler County et al
as 4:2016cv04204
Plaintiff:
Terry C. Johnson
Defendant:
Schuyler County, James Chris Clayton, Jerry J. Hooker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Washington et al v. Combe Incorporated et al
as 3:2016cv00611
Plaintiff:
Sylvester Washington , Isiah Staley , Gregory Beatty and others
Defendant:
Combe Incorporated , Combe Products, Inc. , Combe Laboratories, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hooker et al v. Checkers Drive-In Restaurants, Inc.
as 1:2014cv09252
Plaintiff:
Tasha Hooker and Dominique Shoals
Defendant:
Checkers Drive-In Restaurants, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
