Cases 11 - 20 of 20
LEAKE v. ANDERSON et al
as 2:2011cv04014
Plaintiff:
JAMES LEAKE
Defendant:
ANDERSON and WILSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LEAKE v. DILLMAN
as 2:2010cv07406
Petitioner:
RICKY LEAKE
Respondent:
JEFFREY N. DILLMAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
LEAKE v. SEATRAIN LINES, INC.
as 2:2010cv32859
Plaintiff:
ROBERT J. LEAKE
Defendant:
SEATRAIN LINES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
THOMPSON et al v. WILLIAMS et al
as 2:2009cv01432
Plaintiff:
JAMES S. THOMPSON, EUNICE THOMPSON LEAKE and DAVID LEAKE
Defendant:
WILLIAMS, UNKNOWN FEMALE PROBATION OFFICER, FAYETTE COUNTY ADULT PROBATION OFFICE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
THOMPSON et al v. HOWARD et al
as 2:2009cv01416
Plaintiff:
JAMES S. THOMPSON, RAE LYNN SIGWALT, MRS. RICH CHECK and others
Defendant:
NORMAN HOWARD, ROY MEHALIK, REDSTONE TOWNSHIP and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
LEAKE v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2009cv04564
Plaintiff:
ARMY JOE LEAKE, II
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688 Jones Act
LEAKE v. U.S. RUBBER COMPANY (UNIROYAL)
as 2:2009cv90110
Plaintiff:
GLENN R. LEAKE and GLENN R. LEAKE
Defendant:
U.S. RUBBER COMPANY (UNIROYAL)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
LEAKE V. MEAD, ET AL.
as 2:2009cv87601
Plaintiff:
GLENN R. LEAKE
Defendant:
A.P. SERVICES, INC., A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, AMERICAN STANDARD, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
LEAK v. 3M, ET AL.
as 2:2008cv74987
Plaintiff:
RICHARD LEAK, JR
Defendant:
3M, A-BEX CORPORATION, A.K. STEEL CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Lampkin et al v. Lassiter et al
as 2:2007cv68978
Plaintiff:
Jimmy D. Lampkin, Cecelia Lampkin, Gerald Landreth and others
Defendant:
Ernest L. Lassiter, WILLIAM H. LEE and Betty Lemons
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.
