Cases 41 - 50 of 2,141
Adams v. United States of America et al
as 1:2024cv10562
Plaintiff:
Mark Alan Adams
Defendant:
United States of America, Michigan, State of, Saginaw, County of and others
White v. Mosley et al
as 2:2024cv10506
Plaintiff:
Mark White
Defendant:
Marvin Mosley, Sergeant Garrow, Serena Landfair and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Denlinger v. Rios et al
as 2:2024cv10452
Plaintiff:
Adam Denlinger
Defendant:
David Rios, Mark Sievers, Brenda Hernandez and others
Dobronski v. Baid et al
as 2:2024cv10297
Plaintiff:
Mark W. Dobronski
Defendant:
Ratan Lal Baid, Vivek Baid and ELD Mandate
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Hill v. LaJoye-Young
as 1:2024cv00116
Petitioner:
Mark Allen Hill
Defendant:
Michelle LaJoye-Young
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Evans et al v. Gordon et al
as 2:2024cv10289
Plaintiff:
Andrew Evans and Ryan Geheb
Defendant:
Mark Gordon, Bradley Beldo, Christopher Harmon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Gera v. Barra et al
as 2:2024cv10254
Plaintiff:
Samhita Gera
Defendant:
Mary T. Barra, Paul A. Jacobson, Aneel Bhusri and others
Davis et al v. Berrien, County of et al
as 1:2024cv00088
Plaintiff:
Melvin Davis, Sr., Charase Dorsey, Anisha Bird and others
Defendant:
Berrien, County of, Steve Pierangeli, Mark Sanford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Other Civil Rights
Farmington Hills, City of v. Seltzer
as 2:2024cv10146
Plaintiff:
Farmington Hills, City of
Defendant:
Mark Seltzer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal
Dobronski v. Training Force USA LLC et al
as 2:2024cv10083
Defendant:
Tina Lynette Pichard, Training Force USA LLC, Claude Arthur Pichard, III and others
Plaintiff:
Mark W. Dobronski
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
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.
