Cases 31 - 40 of 55
Horton et al v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2015cv06911
Plaintiff:
Dera Horton and James Horton
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Bennett v. Nicholson et al
as 3:2015cv00482
Plaintiff:
Corey Alan Bennett
Defendant:
John Nicholson, Tommy Vance, James Horton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Cornelius Badger, Jr.
as 15-1617
Petitioner:
In re: CORNELIUS A. BADGER, JR.
Respondent:
QUINTON KENNEDY, ZIKIYYAH JACKSON, DONALD THOMAS and others
Nominal Respondent:
C. DARNELL JONES, II
PRICE et al v. UPPER DARBY SCHOOL DISTRICT
as 2:2015cv00131
Plaintiff:
MARY PRICE and JAMES HORTON
Defendant:
UPPER DARBY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1400 Civil Rights of Handicapped Child
Charles Boyd et al v. County of Riverside et al
as 5:2014cv00336
Defendant:
Access Securepak, Alverez, Amador and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Boyd, John Brown, Robert Castro and others
Blythe, Indio, RPDC, Smith, SWBC:
Riverside County Jail System
Horton et al v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv29129
Plaintiff:
Ann Horton and James Horton
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. , Ethicon, LLC and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. HORTON
as 1:2013cv00666
Defendant:
JOHN DOE and JAMES HORTON
Plaintiff:
MALIBU MEDIA, LLC
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 13-1015
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Horton v. Pobjecky et al
as 1:2012cv07784
Plaintiff:
James Horton
Defendant:
Frank Pobjecky , Richard Meyers and Winnebago County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 12-3156
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
