Cases 21 - 29 of 29
Daniel Harvey v. George Chanos, et al
as 10-16499
Petitioner - Appellant:
DANIEL THOMAS HARVEY
Respondent - Appellee:
GEORGE J. CHANOS, Attorney General State of Nevada and KEVIN YOUNG, Division of Parole and Probation, CC, NV
Harvey v. City of South Lake Tahoe et al
as 2:2010cv01653
Plaintiff:
Daniel Thomas Harvey
Defendant:
City of South Lake Tahoe, El Dorado County, CA, Andrew Eissinger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harvey v. Apple, Inc.
as 3:2009cv05242
Plaintiff:
Thomas Harvey
Defendant:
Apple, Inc., Apple, Inc., Apple, Inc. and others
Counter-claimant:
Apple, Inc., Apple, Inc., Apple, Inc. and others
Counter-defendant:
Thomas Harvey and Thomas Harvey
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
Weinrib v. Considine et al
as 8:2008cv02591
Plaintiff:
Lori Weinrib
Defendant:
Terry Considine, Thomas L. Rhodes, Bruce D. Benson and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Harvey v. Crist et al
as 3:2008cv00796
Petitioner:
Robert Thomas Harvey
Defendant:
Charlie Crist, Milton Hicks and Attorney General for the State of Florida
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Doe v. The Delaware Valley School District et al
as 3:2008cv00756
Plaintiff:
Melanie Doe
Defendant:
The Delaware Valley School District and Thomas Harvey Matthews
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Harvey v. Apple, Inc.
as 2:2007cv00327
Plaintiff:
Thomas Harvey
Defendant:
Apple, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
Harvey v. Chanos et al
as 3:2007cv00114
Petitioner:
Daniel Thomas Harvey
Respondent:
George J. Chanos and Kevin Young
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Harvey v. Chanos et al
as 3:2007cv00113
Petitioner:
Daniel Thomas Harvey
Respondent:
Kevin Young
Defendant:
Kristine L. Brown and Nevada Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
