Cases 21 - 30 of 37
Franklin et al v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 2:2012cv02098
Plaintiff:
Ruth Franklin and Paul Franklin, Jr.
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Franklin et al v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as MOW/4:12-cv-00686
Plaintiff:
Ruth Franklin and Paul Franklin, Jr.
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Franklin et al v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 4:2012cv00686
Plaintiff:
Ruth Franklin and Paul Franklin, Jr.
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SAPP v. LINKED COMMUNICATIONS et al
as 3:2012cv00245
Plaintiff:
JASON SAPP
Defendant:
LINKED COMMUNICATIONS and PAUL FRANKLIN
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Garner v. Miller-Stout
as 2:2012cv00195
Petitioner:
Paul Franklin Garner
Respondent:
Maggie Miller-Stout
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Paul Franklin v. Rick Thaler, Director
as 12-20202
Petitioner - Appellant:
PAUL FRANKLIN
Respondent - Appellee:
RICK THALER, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Franklin v. Thaler
as 4:2012cv00612
Petitioner:
Paul Franklin
Respondent:
Rick Thaler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Paul Franklin v. Rick Thaler, Director
as 09-20803
Petitioner - Appellant:
PAUL FRANKLIN
Respondent - Appellee:
RICK THALER, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Franklin v. TDCJ Director
as 4:2009cv03604
Petitioner:
Paul Franklin
Respondent:
TDCJ Director
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BIGGS v. A.C. AND S., INC. et al
as 2:2009cv84516
Plaintiff:
PAUL FRANKLIN BIGGS, PAUL FRANKLIN BIGGS, LINDA BIGGS and others
Defendant:
ANCHOR PACKING COMPANY, ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC., ASBESTOS CLAIMS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
