Cases 31 - 40 of 44
Cuna Mutual Insurance Society v. Thompson et al
as 3:2011cv04011
Plaintiff:
Cuna Mutual Insurance Society
Defendant:
Marshall Douglas Thompson and Michael Kanyon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Thompson v. Lombardi et al
as 2:2011cv04115
Plaintiff:
Douglas Thompson
Defendant:
George Lombardi and Ellis McSwain
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Winningham et al v. Denney et al
as 4:2010cv00948
Plaintiff:
Roger Winningham and Douglas Thompson
Defendant:
Larry Denney and Missouri Board of Parole
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
THOMPSON v. RAYMARK INDUSTRIES, INC. et al
as 2:2010cv79467
Plaintiff:
HENRY DOUGLAS THOMPSON
Defendant:
RAYMARK INDUSTRIES, INC., GAF CORPORATION, H. K. PORTER COMPANY, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Thompson v. South Carolina Department of Corrections et al
as 0:2010cv00983
Plaintiff:
Douglas Thompson
Defendant:
South Carolina Department of Corrections and South Carolina Department of Probation Parole and Pardon Services
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
THOMPSON et al v. USA
as 1:2009cv00612
Plaintiff:
CONNIE THOMPSON , DOUGLAS THOMPSON , SARANAC MINI STORAGE, LLC and others
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1491
Type:
Other Statutes
Douglas Thompson v. A.r. Wilfley & Sons, et al.
as PAE/2:09-CV-76970
Plaintiff:
Douglas Thompson
Defendant:
A.r. Wilfley & Sons
THOMPSON v. A.R. WILFLEY & SONS et al
as 2:2009cv76970
Plaintiff:
DOUGLAS THOMPSON
Defendant:
A.R. WILFLEY & SONS, ACF VALVES, A.W. CHESTERTON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
Thompson et al v. MO Board of Probation & Parole
as 4:2008cv01004
Petitioner:
Douglas Thompson and Roger Winningham
Respondent:
MO Board of Probation & Parole
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Thompson v. Crawford, et al
as 4:2008cv00239
Petitioner:
Douglas Thompson
Respondent:
Larry Crawford and Missouri Dept. of Corrections
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
