Cases 21 - 30 of 80
Duane Rader v. Young Buck
as 19-10726
Defendant / Appellee:
YOUNG BUCK, Rapper, Interscope Records
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DUANE AUBRY RADER, also known as Trane, also known as Train, also known as Coltrane, also known as Lil Aubry, also known as D-Man, also known as Black
Manning et al v. Progressive American Insurance Company
as 9:2019cv80822
Plaintiff:
Janet S Manning and Norman D Manning
Defendant:
Progressive American Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Manning v. Seattle Public Health et al
as 2:2019cv00372
Plaintiff:
Samuel D Manning
Defendant:
King County Public Health and Seattle Public Health
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Manning v. King County DAJD et al
as 2:2018cv01568
Defendant:
Captain Yuri, King County DAJD Policy, Officer M. Williams and others
Plaintiff:
Samuel D. Manning
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Manning v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner
as 5:2018cv00346
Plaintiff:
Roger D Manning
Defendant:
Social Security Administration, Commissioner
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Mans v. Secretary Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2017cv21054
Plaintiff:
Cory D. Mans
Defendant:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General of the State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Hoskyn v. Hunter et al
as 4:2017cv00133
Plaintiff:
Charles Hoskyn
Defendant:
S Kyle Hunter, Karres D Manning, Arkansas, State of and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Other Civil Rights
Manning v. USA
as 4:2017cv00109
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Reco D Manning
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Patrick v. Hills et al
as 5:2016cv00357
Plaintiff:
Eddie Patrick, Jr
Defendant:
Beverly Hills, Joyce Wilburn Ford, Kim Bridgeforth and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
US v. Daniel Mathi
as 16-4633
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
DANIEL LAMONT MATHIS, a/k/a Gunna, a/k/a Mooch, a/k/a D-Man
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.
