Cases 31 - 40 of 57
James Malarik, et al v. Beaver County Jail Administrat, et al
as 21-3175
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES M. MALARIK
Plaintiff / Appellee:
DAVID LYONS, SR. and ERNEST THORTON
Defendant / Appellee:
BEAVER COUNTY JAIL ADMINISTRATION, STEVE COOLEY, RUDOLPH GUILAY and others
ADESHINA v. MUSK et al
as 4:2021cv00403
Plaintiff:
YINKA A ADESHINA
Defendant:
ELON MUSK, WESLEY SNIPES, JAMIE FOXX and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Davis v. Putin et al
as 5:2021cv00292
Plaintiff:
Andrew C. Davis
Defendant:
Vladimir Putin and Rosatom Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Epperson v. Foreign Ministry Affairs et al
as 1:2021cv00785
Defendant:
Foreign Ministry Affairs, David Orsby, Hillary Clinton and others
Plaintiff:
Chris Epperson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Garcia v. Newsom et al
as 3:2021cv01034
Plaintiff:
Jose Luis Garcia and Borgia Castillon Avelino
Defendant:
Liza Echeverria, Avelino Castilon Castellanos, Camarillo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PS) Briggs v Putin, et al
as 2:2020cv01753
Plaintiff:
Vikki Lynn Briggs
Defendant:
City of Sacramento, Lee and Assoc., Sheraton Grand Hotel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
MCLEAN et al v. RUSSIAN FEDERATION, COUNTRY OF 1924 TO PRESENT PROSECUTOR GENERAL OF RUSSIA et al
as 1:2019cv03312
Defendant:
INTERNET RESEARCH AGENCY, FACEBOOK, INC., URANIUM ONE GROUP and others
Plaintiff:
ESTATE OF LOUIS FANNING, SR., ESTATE OF JAMES MCLEAN and VICKI FANNING MCLEAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Joshua v. United States Of America et al
as 1:2019cv20348
Defendant:
Instagram, Holliness Temple Church International "Holiness Temple", Facebook, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
King Joshua
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Frazier v. Putin
as 1:2018cv07322
Plaintiff:
Melvin Frazier, Jr.
Defendant:
Vladimir Putin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 cv
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.
