Cases 31 - 40 of 51
Bowles v. Shelby County Jail et al
as 2:2015cv02233
Plaintiff:
Tondreon M. Bowles
Defendant:
Shelby County Jail, R. Moore, Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ryder et al v. Bowling
as 2:2014cv00366
Plaintiff:
Mary Margaret Ryder , Chad James Tacy and James Cody Ryder
Defendant:
Kevin James Bowling
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Bowling et al v. United Parcel Service, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv00270
Plaintiff:
Kevin Bowling and Pam Bowling
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc. and Estate of James B. Tacy, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
White et al v. State of Tennessee et al
as 2:2014cv00115
Plaintiff:
Danielle M White, John No. 1 Doe and John No. 2 Doe
Defendant:
State of Tennessee, Steve Burns, Tennessee Correctional Institute and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2014cv00032
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Bowling v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp.
as 3:2013cv00514
Plaintiff:
Angelia R. Bowling
Defendant:
Howmedica Osteonics Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal- Product Liability
Cates v. Bowles et al
as 3:2012cv00631
Plaintiff:
Lonnie J. Cates
Defendant:
William Bowles and Michael Bowles
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Harris et al v. Heil et al
as 3:2012cv01167
Plaintiff:
Marcellus Harris, Shakeitha Cannon, Onterrio Crowell and others
Defendant:
Anthony J. Heil, Daniel J. Bowling, David Humes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Union Leasing, Inc. v. Advantage, Inc. et al
as 3:2012cv00666
Plaintiff:
Union Leasing, Inc.
Defendant:
Advantage, Inc., Robert Mark Mooneyham and ABC Bowling Green, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Madix v. Smith et al (TV2)
as 3:2012cv00123
Plaintiff:
Steven G Madix
Defendant:
Dennis Smith, Robert Sartin and Victoria Bowling
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
