Cases 31 - 40 of 73
Wilson v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction et al
as 1:2020cv00023
Defendant:
Unit Manager Chief, Doad, Reader and others
Plaintiff:
Eric Wilson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cook v. Sheldon, et al.
as 1:2019cv02914
Defendant:
Sergeant Gould, L. Booth, Correctional Officer Hoehn and others
Plaintiff:
Dennis Genairo Cook
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Booth v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2019cv03869
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Clarise Booth
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Clay v. Weidner et al
as 1:2019cv01916
Defendant:
Scott Basquin, Charles Moore, McKalee Weidner and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Clay
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Booth v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2019cv01801
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Leslie Booth
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Booth v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2019cv00874
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
David L. Booth
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv02739
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227
Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute et al v. Smith et al
as 1:2018mc00116
Plaintiff:
Linda Goldenhar, Beth Hutton, Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute and others
Defendant:
Larry Obhof, Ryan Smith and Jon Husted
Intervenor:
Dave Joyce, Robert F, Bodi, Bill Johnson and others
Petitioner:
Armond D Budish and Christopher Glassburn
SUBPOENA SERVED ON E. MARK BRADEN
as 1:2018mc00029
Respondent:
Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute, Cynthia Libster, League of Women Voters of Ohio and others
In Re:
SUBPOENA SERVED ON E. MARK BRADEN
Petitioner:
E. Mark Braden and Ohio Attorney General
SUBPOENA SERVED ON E. MARK BRADEN et al
as 1:2018mc00032
Respondent:
Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute, Cynthia Libster, League of Women Voters of Ohio and others
Petitioner:
E. Mark Braden
In Re:
SUBPOENA SERVED ON E. MARK BRADEN
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.
