Cases 41 - 50 of 395
Howard-Ward v. Regent University et al
as 2:2022cv00235
Plaintiff:
Redmond J. Howard-Ward
Defendant:
Regent University and Elijah K. Agyapong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Moone v. Clarke
as 2:2022cv00135
Petitioner:
Nathaniel Howard Moone
Respondent:
Director Harold Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Moone v. Clarke
as 7:2022cv00160
Petitioner:
Nathaniel Howard Moone
Respondent:
Harold Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Woodson v. Hanheimer et al
as 7:2022cv00113
Plaintiff:
Roosevelt Harry Woodson, Jr.
Defendant:
Mr. Howard J. Manheimer and Mr. David L. Hensley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00003
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Cooke v. CT Corporation/Jack Kent Cooke Foundation et al
as 1:2021cv01401
Defendant:
Ryan Denise Estes, Cathy Korell, CT Corporation/Jack Kent Cooke Foundation and others
Plaintiff:
Jacqueline Kent Cooke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Inoa et al v. Gerber Products Company-
as 1:2021cv01171
Plaintiff:
Vanessa Inoa, Augusta Guffroy, Cassie Isza and others
Defendant:
Gerber Products Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Spanos v. Vick
as 3:2021cv00638
Plaintiff:
Nickolas G. Spanos
Defendant:
Howard C. Vick, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal-Civil Rights
Moone v. Herrick et al
as 7:2021cv00472
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Howard Moone
Defendant:
Steve Herrick, Trey Fuller, Ross and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kiser v. Carlton et al
as 7:2021cv00455
Plaintiff:
Brandon Darrell Kiser
Defendant:
Howard Carlton, Tom Dooley and Dr. Josef
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
