Cases 31 - 40 of 76
Lyons v. Bluenergy Group Limited, f/k/a CBD Energy Limited et al
as 4:2016cv02704
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Lyons
Defendant:
Bluenrgy Group Limited, Richard Pillinger, Todd Barlow and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Green v. Barlow et al
as 4:2016cv01700
Plaintiff:
Bryan Edwin Green
Defendant:
Rachelle Barlow and Robert Castleberry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Barlow v. The Kroger Co.
as 3:2015cv00205
Plaintiff:
David Barlow
Defendant:
The Kroger Co.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Johnson v. CBD Energy Limited et al
as 4:2015cv01668
Plaintiff:
Michael Johnson and Mahmmoud Sakhi
Defendant:
CBD Energy Limited, National Securities Corporation , Northland Securities, Inc. and others
Movant:
Shan Zhengjian and Charles McKissick
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77
Barlow v. Colvin
as 2:2015cv00180
Plaintiff:
Tim C Barlow
Defendant:
Carolyn Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205
Green v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice et al
as 4:2015cv01353
Petitioner:
Bryan Edwin Green
Defendant:
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Rachelle Barlow and Bob K Castleberry, II
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Barlowe v. Johnson & Johnson Services Inc et al
as 3:2015cv01140
Plaintiff:
Frank Barlowe
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Services Inc , Johnson & Johnson Inc and DePuy Orthopaedics Inc
Pecial_master:
Special Master
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Keifer v. Paschall Truck Lines, Inc. et al
as 2:2015cv00123
Plaintiff:
Gary Keifer
Defendant:
Paschall Truck Lines, Inc. and Darrius Barlow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Barlow v. Daniels
as 1:2014cv00546
Plaintiff:
Douglas Lee Barlow
Defendant:
Charles Daniels
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Johnson v. CBD Energy Limited et al
as 2:2014cv00997
Plaintiff:
Michael Johnson
Defendant:
CBD Energy Limited, National Securities Corporation, Northland Securities, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77
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.
