Cases 31 - 40 of 440
Brooks v. Kelly
as 5:2023hc02129
Petitioner:
Scott Brooks
Respondent:
L. Kelly
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
HILL v. MAYNARD et al
as 1:2023cv00479
Plaintiff:
Brooke Olivia Hill
Defendant:
Orlando Ardae Maynard and TOWN OF ELON, NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Brooks Bell Interactive, Inc. v. Heap Inc.
as 5:2023cv00293
Plaintiff:
Brooks Bell Interactive, Inc.
Defendant:
Heap Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Trademark
Brooks v. United States of America
as 7:2023cv00709
Plaintiff:
Samuel Brooks, Jr.
Defendant:
United States of America
Interested Party:
Torts Branch USDOJ
Brooks v. United States of America
as 7:2023cv00774
Plaintiff:
Christine Brooks
Defendant:
United States of America
Interested Party:
Torts Branch USDOJ
Icenhour v. Alexander Trucking Company, Inc. et al
as 5:2023cv00041
Counter Defendant:
Steve G. Icenhour
Counter Claimant:
Alexander Trucking Company, Inc., BMA, LLC, David Brooks Allen and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Epic Tech, LLC et al v. Raleigh Startup Solutions LLC et al
as 5:2023cv00136
Plaintiff:
Epic Tech, LLC and Blue Streak Bids, LLC
Defendant:
Raleigh Startup Solutions LLC, Chuck Patel, Neal Patel and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Allen v. Person County et al
as 5:2023cv00131
Plaintiff:
Derrick Allen
Defendant:
Person County, Durham County, N.C. Highway Patrol and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00030
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Brooks v. United States of America
as 7:2023cv00089
Plaintiff:
Darlene Brooks, as Personal Representative of the Estate of James Brooks, Jr. and Darlene Brooks
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Interested Party:
Torts Branch USDOJ
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.
