Cases 31 - 40 of 40
Garza v. Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc. et al
as 3:2012cv03170
Plaintiff:
Raul Garza
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc. , Johnson & Johnson, Inc. and DePuy Orthopaedics Inc
Pecial_master:
Special Master
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Garza v. Knipp
as 2:2011cv03010
Plaintiff:
Raul Garza, Jr.
Defendant:
W. Knipp
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Garza v. Knipp
as 5:2011cv05093
Plaintiff:
Raul Garza, Jr.
Defendant:
W. Knipp
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Duce v. Livingston et al
as 2:2009cv00265
Plaintiff:
Macky R Duce
Defendant:
Brad Livingston, Diana Kukua, Exiquito Garza and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
In re: Raul Garza, Jr., Esq.
as 09-80102
Respondent:
In re: RAUL GARZA, Jr., Esquire, Admitted to the bar of the Ninth Circuit: June 25, 2002,
Tamez v. Quarterman
as 08-40875
Petitioner - Appellant:
RAUL GARZA TAMEZ
Respondent - Appellee:
NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Raul Tamez v. Rick Thaler, Director
as 08-40615
Petitioner - Appellant:
RAUL GARZA TAMEZ
Respondent - Appellee:
NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION and RICK THALER, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Garza et al v. Brown et al
as 1:2008cv00254
Plaintiff:
Noelia Garza and Raul Garza
Defendant:
Greg Brown, Helen Brown and Bernette Brown
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Tamez v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 6:2007cv00362
Petitioner:
Raul Garza Tamez
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Longoria v. Merck & Co Inc et al
as 2:2007cv00918
Plaintiff:
Ben Longoria and Ben Longoria
Defendant:
Merck & Co Inc, Merck & Co Inc, Merck & Co Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
