Cases 41 - 50 of 146,974
Tom v. Thomas Roofing and Repair Inc. et al
as 6:2024cv01037
Plaintiff:
David Tom
Defendant:
Thomas Roofing and Repair Inc. and Pinnacle Marketing Solutions LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv04653
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Corbin et al v. Layma, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv04646
Defendant:
Layma, LLC also known as Layama, LLC doing business as Little Lake Lending, Ben G. Ray, III, John Does 1-20 and others
Plaintiff:
Samantha Corbin and Thomas Ross
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Arnold III v. Raoul et al
as 1:2024cv04614
Plaintiff:
Eugene Nathaniel Arnold III
Defendant:
Kwame Raoul, Thomas J. Dart, J.B. Pritzker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nance v. Lillard
as 3:2024cv01444
Petitioner:
James Lawrence Nance
Respondent:
Thomas Lillard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Stickney v. Warden David Paul of Federal Medical Center Lexington
as 5:2024cv00148
Petitioner:
Brian Thomas Stickney
Respondent:
Warden David Paul of Federal Medical Center Lexington
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv04036
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Barrett v. Group Short Term Disability Plan for Employees of COTY, INC.
as 5:2024cv00315
Plaintiff:
Thomas Barrett
Defendant:
Group Short Term Disability Plan for Employees of COTY, INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
SNYDER v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
as 5:2024cv02432
Plaintiff:
THOMAS SNYDER
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
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.
