Cases 51 - 60 of 72
Gary Miller v. C. Godwin
as 10-7581
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GARY L. MILLER
Defendant - Appellee:
C. GODWIN, C/O, SERGEANT MCKOY and MS. WASHINGTON, Nurse
MILLER v. DOWNEY et al
as 2:2010cv00872
Plaintiff:
GARY L. MILLER
Defendant:
PHILLIP A. DOWNEY and FRANK J. TANZOSH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Seger v. Dorsow et al
as 0:2010cv00312
Plaintiff:
Jamison Kelvin Seger
Defendant:
Butch Dorsow, Dan Anselment and Gary L Miller
Miller v. Tennis
as 4:2010cv00051
Petitioner:
Gary Adam Miller
Respondent:
Franklyn J. Tennis and PA Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Buchholz et al v. Medtronic, Inc. et al
as 0:2009cv03275
Plaintiff:
Jessica C. Buchholz, Jessica C. Buchholz, Jessica C. Buchholz and others
Defendant:
Medtronic, Inc., Medtronic International Technology, Inc. and Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co. Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 -pip-Diversity-Personal Injury, Product Liability
Type:
Other Statutes
Buchholz et al v. Medtronic, Inc. et al
as 4:2009cv03185
Plaintiff:
Jessica C. Buchholz, Michael Alan Close, Berton R. Miller and others
Defendant:
Medtronic, Inc., Medtronic International Technology, Inc. and Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Gary Miller v. Rick Thaler, Director
as 09-20646
Petitioner - Appellant:
GARY LLOYD MILLER
Respondent - Appellee:
RICK THALER, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
MILLER V. MEAD, ET AL.
as 2:2009cv87616
Plaintiff:
GARY E. MILLER
Defendant:
A.P. SERVICES, INC., A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, AMERICAN STANDARD, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
Miller v. Godwin et al
as 5:2009ct03153
Plaintiff:
Gary L. Miller
Defendant:
C/O C. Godwin, Sargeant McKoy and Ms. Washington
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.
