Cases 21 - 30 of 50
United States of America v. Arizona, State of, et al
as 2:2010cv01413
Defendant:
Arizona, State of and Janice K Brewer
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Intervenor_defendant:
Russell K Pearce and Larry A Dever
Movant:
David Salgado , Chicanos Por La Causa, Inc. and Martin H Escobar
Amicu:
John Kavanagh , Allied Educational Foundation , National Border Patrol Council and others
Intervenor:
Richard Mack
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Rowe et al v. New York City et al
as 1:2010cv05058
Plaintiff:
Davial Rowe and Nagi Benson
Defendant:
New York City, Richard Mack, Douglas L. Graham and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Perry v. Kelso et al
as 4:2010cv02712
Plaintiff:
Gregory Perry
Defendant:
J. Clark Kelso, Susan Pido, Gloria Kalisher and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Perry v. Pido et al
as 4:2010cv02593
Plaintiff:
Gregory Perry
Defendant:
Susan Pido, Gloria Kalisher, Daniel Jardini and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Deshazo v. City of New York et al
as 1:2009cv08916
Plaintiff:
Erika Deshazo
Defendant:
City of New York, Richard Mack, John Doe 1 Through 10 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CLOWERS v. HALL
as 1:2009cv00785
Plaintiff:
RICHARD MACK CLOWERS
Defendant:
JAMES HALL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CLOWERS v. JENKEN
as 1:2009cv00787
Plaintiff:
RICHARD MACK CLOWERS
Defendant:
MIKE JENKEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CLOWERS v. MCCASE
as 1:2009cv00786
Plaintiff:
RICHARD MACK CLOWERS
Defendant:
MCCASE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CLOWERS v. HERRON
as 1:2009cv00789
Plaintiff:
RICHARD MACK CLOWERS
Defendant:
JOE N. HERRON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CLOWERS v. KENT
as 1:2009cv00790
Plaintiff:
RICHARD MACK CLOWERS
Defendant:
MR. KENT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
