Cases 11 - 20 of 28
Sprankle v. Jackson et al
as 1:2023cv03448
Plaintiff:
Nicky A. Sprankle
Defendant:
Roderick Jackson, JRC Transportation, Inc. and Sentry Select Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal - Motor Vehicle
United States v. Jackson
as 23-8003
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
DAVID A. JACKSON, AKA Gerald David Jackson, AKA Gerald D. Roderick-Jackson
United States v. Jackson
as 22-8032
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
DAVID A. JACKSON, AKA Gerald David Jackson, AKA Gerald D. Roderick-Jackson
Mitton et al v. Christian Insurance Group, et al
as 1:2022cv00235
Plaintiff:
Amber Mitton, Shani Rasor, Cameron Cook and others
Defendant:
Christian Insurance Group, d/b/a Christian Financial, Jacob Hagg, Noah Bushnell and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Jackson v. Wal-Mart, Inc.
as 5:2021cv05066
Defendant:
Wal-Mart, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Roderick Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
JACKSON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv88440
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
RODERICK JACKSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv01380
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv01629
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
JACKSON v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2017cv00287
Plaintiff:
RODERICK JACKSON
Defendant:
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS , LACHAKA MCKENZIE and GREGORY MCLAUGHLIN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jackson v. McLaughlin
as 4:2016cv00332
Petitioner:
Roderick Jackson
Respondent:
Gregory McLaughlin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
