Cases 21 - 30 of 563
Pryor et al v. Anderson et al
as 4:2023cv00125
Plaintiff:
Judy A. Pryor and Arnold L. Pryor
Defendant:
Daniel D. Anderson and Orthopaedic Associates, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Ulerio v. Russell et al
as 1:2023cv01359
Plaintiff:
Juan Ulerio
Defendant:
Austin Russell, Mike McAuliffe, Alec E. Gores and others
Nominal Defendant:
Luminar Technologies, Inc.
Hutchinson v. Russell et al
as 1:2023cv01345
Plaintiff:
David Hutchinson
Defendant:
Austin Russell, Mike McAuliffe, Alec E. Gores and others
Nominal Defendant:
Luminar Technologies, Inc.
Utecht, Daniel v. Buesgen, Christopher
as 3:2023cv00792
Petitioner:
Daniel D. Utecht
Respondent:
Christopher Buesgen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dechant et al v. Gores et al
as 1:2023cv01318
Plaintiff:
Lance Dechant and William Voges
Defendant:
Alec E. Gores, Jun Hong Heng, Mary Lou Jepsen and others
Nominal Defendant:
Luminar Technologies, Inc.
Bhavsar et al v. McAuliffe et al
as 6:2023cv02037
Plaintiff:
Denish Bhavsar and Samhita Gera
Defendant:
Mike McAuliffe, Alec E Gores, Jun Hong Heng and others
Bailey v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 2:2023cv03468
Interested Party:
SSA
Plaintiff:
Daniel D. Bailey
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Turnbull v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel et al
as 2:2023cv01619
Plaintiff:
Edward Randolph Turnbull, IV
Defendant:
Office of Disciplinary Counsel, Doug Ende, Craig Bray and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Sease v. Eplett
as 2:2023cv01388
Petitioner:
Daniel D Sease
Respondent:
Warden Cheryl Eplett
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Backus v. Glassel et al
as 9:2023cv00180
Plaintiff:
Caterrion Backus
Defendant:
Kent Glassel, Scott W. Grimm, Caulder R. Schwarz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
