Cases 31 - 40 of 40
Edward Flint v. Charles Simpson, III
as 11-5727
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARD H. FLINT
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES R. SIMPSON, III, Judge
Flint v. Simpson
as 3:2011cv00275
Plaintiff:
Edward H. Flint
Defendant:
Charles R. Simpson, III
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Connie Marshall v. Charles Simpson, III, et al
as 10-5640
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CONNIE MARSHALL
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES R. SIMPSON, III, Judge, JOHN G. HEYBURN, II, Judge, JENNIFER B. COFFMAN, Judge and others
Connie Marshall v. Charles Simpson, III, et al
as 10-5459
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CONNIE MARSHALL
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES R. SIMPSON, III, Judge, JOHN G. HEYBURN, II, Judge, JENNIFER B. COFFMAN, Judge and others
Daniel Cobble v. Charles Simpson, III, et al
as 10-5071
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DANIEL COBBLE
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES R. SIMPSON, III, DAVIE WHALIN, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General and others
Marshall v. Simpson et al
as 3:2010cv00020
Plaintiff:
Connie Marshall
Defendant:
Charles Simpson, III, John Heyburn, II, Jennifer Coffman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Cobble v. Simpson et al
as 3:2009cv00682
Plaintiff:
Daniel Cobble
Defendant:
Charles R. Simpson, III, Dave Whalin, Eric Holder and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Essie Simpson, III v. John Marshall
as 2:2009cv01825
Petitioner:
Essie Simpson, III
Respondent:
John Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cobble v. Simpson et al
as 3:2008cv00668
Plaintiff:
Daniel Cobble
Defendant:
Charles R. Simpson, III and Mike Simpson
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Essie Simpson v. Jason Schwab et al
as 2:2008cv04463
Plaintiff:
Essie Simpson, III
Defendant:
Jason Schwab, Sean Kinchla and L.A.P.D. 77th
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Forma Pauperis Denial
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.
