Cases 31 - 40 of 4,347
Jon Tate Construction, LLC et al v. Sika Corporation et al
as 1:2024cv03229
Plaintiff:
Jon Tate Construction, LLC and Jon S. Garrett d/b/a Black River Masonry, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated
Defendant:
Sika Corporation, Sika AG, Chryso, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Snedeker v. State of Colorado, et al
as 24-1173
Plaintiff:
BRADFORD WAYNE SNEDEKER, SR.
Defendant:
STATE OF COLORADO, ANJALI NANDI, DENISE MERTZ and others
SINGLETON v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2024vv00653
Petitioner:
VERGIE TATE SINGLETON
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
Aguilar v. Hallings et al
as 2:2024cv00771
Plaintiff:
Tito Barron Aguilar
Defendant:
C/O Hallings, C/O Sergent William Tate, C/O Senior Kelly and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tate v. Unknown
as 3:2024cv00756
Petitioner:
Lionel Tate, Sr.
Respondent:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01153
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Andy Williams, Jr. v. City of Aurora, Illinois, et al
as 24-1635
Plaintiff:
ANDY H. WILLIAMS, JR.
Defendant:
CITY OF AURORA, ILLINOIS, MAYOR RICHARD IRVIN AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF AURORA, KRISTEN ZIMAN and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2024cv00951
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Giles v. Hughes et al
as 1:2024cv01159
Plaintiff:
Anthony Maurice Giles
Defendant:
Latoya Hughes, Chance Jones, Cherryle Hinthorne and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tate v. Jackson et al
as 5:2024cv05093
Plaintiff:
Zerahzhe Authentic Tate
Defendant:
Officer J. Jackson, Special Agent Devito and John or Jane Doe Officers or Agents #1 to #3
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.
