Cases 21 - 30 of 281
Jones v. GlaxoSmithKline et al
as 3:2023cv15980
Plaintiff:
Timothy Jones
Defendant:
GlaxoSmithKline, Patheon Inc., Pfizer Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jones v. GlaxoSmithKline et al
as 3:2023cv15817
Plaintiff:
Timothy Jones
Defendant:
GlaxoSmithKline, Patheon Inc., Pfizer Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Zirus et al v. Religious Practice Committee et al
as 1:2022cv00191
Plaintiff:
Scott Zirus, David Martin, Konchok Tingdzin Wangyal and others
Defendant:
Religious Practice Committee, Timothy Jones, Thomas Brouwer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
US v. Andrew Jones
as 22-4710
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
ANDREW TIMOTHY JONES
US v. Andrew Jones
as 22-7174
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
ANDREW TIMOTHY JONES
Hernandez-Gonzalez v. Jones
as 5:2022hc02192
Petitioner:
Esteban Hernandez-Gonzalez
Respondent:
Timothy Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Turner v. Collier
as 22-20583
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Noel Turner
Defendant / Appellee:
Bryan Collier, Director TDCJ, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Rabbi Goldstein and others
Zirus et al v. Religious Practice Committee et al
as 4:2022cv02858
Plaintiff:
Scott Zirus, David Martin, Konchok Tingdzin Wangyal and others
Defendant:
Religious Practice Committee, Timothy Jones, Thomas Brouwer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv17657
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY JONES
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Logan v. Mississippi Dept of Corr
as 22-60172
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Courtney R. Logan
Defendant / Appellee:
Mississippi Department of Corrections, Haley Barbour, former governor, Nathan Burlcain and others
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.
