Cases 21 - 30 of 1,210
RODRIGUEZ v. BEASLEY et al
as 7:2024cv00025
Plaintiff:
HJALMAR RODRIGUEZ, JR
Defendant:
Warden JACOB BEASLEY, Warden SHAWN EMMONS, Warden BRIAN ADAMS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adams v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv01358
Plaintiff:
Cherea Adams
Defendant:
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Teva Women's Health, LLC, Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Ingram v. Adams
as 1:2024cv01298
Petitioner:
Herman Ingram
Respondent:
Robert Adams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Maddox et al
as 1:2024cv01297
Petitioner:
Stephenson Lamar Smith
Respondent:
Melody M. Maddox, Chief's of Sheriffs office in Dekalb County, Tyrone Walker and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Myers v. Adams
as 6:2024cv00012
Plaintiff:
Daniel Alonzo Myers
Defendant:
Warden Robert Adams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
In re Subpoena to FindIt, Inc.
as 1:2024mi00018
Plaintiff:
Adam Ferrari
Defendant:
William Francis
Respondent:
FindIt, Inc.
Adams v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.
as 2:2024cv00045
Plaintiff:
Corey Adams
Defendant:
Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
BROWN v. ADAMS
as 5:2024cv00065
Petitioner:
MARCUS LAMAR BROWN
Respondent:
ROBERT ADAMS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hoipkemier et al v. Miller et al
as 1:2024cv00600
Plaintiff:
Adam Hoipkemier and Kevin Epps
Defendant:
Duane V. Miller, Eric Macleod, Oak Ridge Project Management, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00322
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
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.
