Cases 11 - 20 of 20
USA v. Jimmy Morri
as 11-13412
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
JIMMY MORRIS
Headley v. City of Steele et al
as 4:2011cv02659
Plaintiff:
Pamela Headley
Defendant:
City of Steele, B. L. McCracken, Jimmy Morris and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Morris et al v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc et al
as 1:2011dp21187
Plaintiff:
Patricia Morris and Jimmy Morris
Defendant:
DePuy Orthopaedics Inc , Depuy Inc. , Johnson & Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MORRIS v. FINNAN
as 1:2011cv00117
Respondent:
FINNAN
Petitioner:
JIMMY MORRIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jimmy Morris v. Vapor Corporation
as PAE/2:09-CV-72477
Defendant:
Vapor Corporation
Plaintiff:
Jimmy Morris
WILLIAMS v. WILLIAMS et al
as 2:2009cv01310
Plaintiff:
TAMIKA WILLIAMS
Defendant:
HERBERT WILLIAMS, ROUTE 1 AUTO RENTALS, JIMMY MORRIS MUNGO and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal-Auto Negligence
WILLIAMS v. WILLIAMS et al
as 3:2009cv01496
Plaintiff:
TAMIKA WILLIAMS
Defendant:
HERBERT WILLIAMS, ROUTE 1 AUTO RENTALS, JIMMY MORRIS MUNGO and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Meyer v. Bledsoe County, TN et al
as 1:2008cv00097
Plaintiff:
Kenneth J Meyer
Defendant:
Bledsoe County, TN, Jimmy Morris and Jacquelyn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ATKINSON et al v. VAPOR CORPORATION
as 2:2007cv73829
Plaintiff:
RONALD ATKINSON, INEZ DORMAN, DAVID LASSEN and others
Defendant:
VAPOR CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
Hedrick, et al v. Metropolitan Life, et al
as 1:2000cv00485
Plaintiff:
Betty Ann Smith, Brenda Diane Jones, Sally F. Tharp and others
Defendant:
U.C. Realty Corporation, Armstrong World Industries, Inc., Insulation Contracting, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
