Cases 11 - 20 of 28
BANKS v. TERRY, et al
as 5:2018cv00435
Defendant:
SHERIFF DAVID DAVIS, DEPUTY T EDWARDS, DEPUTY ANTHONY TERRY and others
Plaintiff:
LEROY BANKS, III, LAVERNE JOHNSON and TAVARIS JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BANKS v. BIBB COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE et al
as 5:2018cv00139
Plaintiff:
LEROY BANKS, III, LAVERNE JOHNSON and TAVARIS JOHNSON
Defendant:
BIBB COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE, ANTHONY TERRY, STEPHEN FIELDS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harold Figueora et al v. County of Los Angeles et al
as 2:2016cv01719
Defendant:
Sgt. Scott Chapman, County of Los Angeles, Does and others
Plaintiff:
Harold Figueora and Yesnia Merino
Eric Chapman v. Willie Smith
as 15-1759
Petitioner - Appellant:
ERIC SCOTT CHAPMAN
Respondent - Appellee:
WILLIE SMITH, Warden
Chapman v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv00092
Plaintiff:
Scott Chapman
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Chapman v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2014cv30845
Plaintiff:
Scott Chapman
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv00089
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Rudolph DDS v. Cunningham et al
as 2:2013cv00181
Plaintiff:
Lawrence P Rudolph DDS
Defendant:
Ralph Cunningham, Larry Higgins, Scott Chapman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
RUDOLPH v. WHIPPLE et al
as 1:2013cv00660
Plaintiff:
LAWRENCE RUDOLPH
Defendant:
JOHN WHIPPLE, RALPH CUNNINGHAM, LARRY HIGGINS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander
Chapman v. Boca Pharmacy Services, Inc. et al
as 9:2013cv80232
Plaintiff:
Scott Chapman
Defendant:
Boca Pharmacy Services, Inc. , Abbott Sales, Marketing & Distribution Company and Abbott Laboratories, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
