Cases 21 - 30 of 5,425
Demos v. Washington State Attorney General
as 2:2024cv00721
Petitioner:
John Robert Demos, Jr
Respondent:
Washington State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Brandon v. Strange et al
as 3:2024cv05399
Plaintiff:
Myron Gaylord Brandon
Defendant:
Strange, Stephen Sinclair, Larry M Connels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McColl v. State of Washington
as 2:2024cv00688
Petitioner:
James John McColl
Respondent:
State of Washington
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson v. Asotin County et al
as 2:2024cv00167
Plaintiff:
Stephen R Jackson, Sr
Defendant:
Asotin County, Asotin County Sheriffs Department, John Hilderbrand and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Leighty v. Spokane County et al
as 2:2024cv00165
Plaintiff:
James Leighty
Defendant:
Spokane County, Sheriff John Nowels and Spokane County Sheriff's Office
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00682
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Loop v. State of Washington et al
as 2:2024cv00669
Plaintiff:
John Torsten Loop
Defendant:
State of Washington, JAMS Mediation Arbitration and ADR Services and Helen L Halpert
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Dixon v. Goguen et al
as 2:2024cv00660
Plaintiff:
Ryan Adam Dixon
Defendant:
Jie Liang Goguen and John/Jane Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
Dahlstrom v. Biden et al
as 2:2024cv00641
Defendant:
Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr, United States of America, Merrick B Garland and others
Plaintiff:
Raju AT Dahlstrom
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hartzell v. Insight Global LLC
as 2:2024cv00633
Plaintiff:
John Hartzell
Defendant:
Insight Global, LLC
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.
