Cases 11 - 20 of 22
MCDANIEL v. JONES et al
as 1:2017cv02790
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH MCDANIEL
Defendant:
R. JONES, BOND and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GRAVES v. TOMBALL REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER et al
as 1:2013cv01032
Defendant:
TOMBALL REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER , LYNN LEBOEUF , KEVIN WHATLEY and others
Plaintiff:
DALE B. GRAVES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal Libel,Assault,Slander
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv00723
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
ESTATE OF MILLIE ANN MCDANIELS v. LIBERTY MUTUAL GROUP INC.
as 1:2012cv00202
Plaintiff:
ESTATE OF MILLIE ANN MCDANIELS
Defendant:
LIBERTY MUTUAL GROUP INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv00545
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CHAPMAN v. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT et al
as 1:2009cv02107
Plaintiff:
J. TODD CHAPMAN
Defendant:
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, EDWARD G. RENDELL, THOMAS CORBETT and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
MCDANIEL v. FENTY
as 1:2009cv00070
Plaintiff:
RONNIE LEE MCDANIEL
Defendant:
ADRIAN FENTY
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
MCDANIEL v. LANIER
as 1:2009cv00007
Plaintiff:
RONNIE LEE MCDANIEL
Defendant:
CATHY L. LANIER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MCDANIEL v. WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
as 1:2008cv02239
Plaintiff:
RONNIE LEE MCDANIEL
Defendant:
WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
MCDANIEL v. U.S. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY et al
as 1:2008cv02244
Plaintiff:
RONNIE LEE MCDANIEL
Defendant:
U.S. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY and OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
