Cases 31 - 39 of 39
Diston et al v. AstraZeneca LP et al
as 3:2009cv04165
Plaintiff:
Sharon Diston, Mae Louise Diaz, Timothy Dixon and others
Defendant:
AstraZeneca LP, AstraZeneca LP, AstraZeneca LP and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability
Diston et al v. AstraZeneca LP et al
as 4:2009cv04165
Plaintiff:
Sharon Diston , Mae Louise Diaz , Timothy Dixon and others
Defendant:
AstraZeneca LP , AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP and McKesson Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Hampton v. Goings et al
as 1:2009cv00599
Defendant:
Reginald Goings, Brian Rodeen and Brad Livingston
Plaintiff:
John Hampton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Garcia et al v. Goings et al
as 1:2009cv00337
Plaintiff:
Alfred Garcia, Cornelius Alix, Anthony J Boyd and others
Defendant:
Reginald Goings, Brian Rodeen and Brad Livingston
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BANEGAS v. HAMPTON et al
as 2:2008cv05348
Plaintiff:
MARIO BANEGAS
Defendant:
JOHN HAMPTON, CHARLES GOODMAN, STEPHON GILCHRIST and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
BANEGAS v. HAMPTON et al
as 2:2008cv04181
Plaintiff:
MARIO BANEGAS
Defendant:
JOHN HAMPTON, CHARLES GOODMAN, STEPHON GILCHRIST and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2008cv00025
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
ANDERSON v. MCDONOUGH et al
as 1:2008cv00013
Petitioner:
JOHN HAMPTON ANDERSON
Respondent:
JAMES R MCDONOUGH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Amir-Sharif v. Commissioners of Dallas Texas et al
as 3:2007cv00175
Plaintiff:
Lakeith Amir-Sharif
Defendant:
Commissioners of Dallas Texas, Lupe Valdez, Dallas County Sheriff's Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
