Cases 31 - 40 of 1,250
Davis, Jr. v. Davol Inc et al
as 2:2024cv02631
Defendant:
CR Bard, Inc. and Davol Inc
Plaintiff:
Clifford Davis, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Titus v. Davis
as 2:2024cv02641
Respondent:
Cynthia Davis
Petitioner:
Timothy Titus
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Alexander v. Davis et al
as 1:2024cv00285
Defendant:
Jennifer Black, John Doe 2, Cynthia D Davis and others
Plaintiff:
Jeron Alexander
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Krzywkowski v. Mohr et al
as 3:2024cv00850
Plaintiff:
Grady Krzywkowski
Defendant:
Mike Davis, Warden Keith Foley, Dessey Cheers and others
Interested Party:
State of Ohio
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Poole v. Marco et al.
as 1:2024cv00847
Plaintiff:
Joyce Poole
Defendant:
Kenneth J. Marco, Richard Marco, John Oberholtzer and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Davis v. Indivior Inc. et al.
as 1:2024sf65462
Plaintiff:
Kyle T Davis
Defendant:
Indivior Inc., Indivior PLC, Indivior Solutions, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Titus v. Davis
as 5:2024cv00817
Petitioner:
Timothy Titus
Respondent:
Warden Cynthia Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davis v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02164
Plaintiff:
Ralph Davis
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Dawson v. Sargus et al
as 2:2024cv02175
Plaintiff:
William T. Dawson, Jr.
Defendant:
Judge Edmund A Sargus, Jr, Christin Werner, Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Hardymon v. Kent et al.
as 1:2024cv00799
Plaintiff:
Shane J Hardymon and Shane Hardymon
Defendant:
Scott Kent, Michael P. Davis, Board of Commissioners of Crawford County, Ohio and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
