Cases 51 - 60 of 86
Scott v. Johnson et al
as 2:2011cv00116
Plaintiff:
Roosevelt Scott
Defendant:
Gene Johnson, Eddie L. Pearson, D. Newcomer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hughes v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
as 2:2011cv00054
Plaintiff:
Michael S Hughes
Defendant:
CSX Transportation, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Day v. Hughes et al
as 2:2011cv00174
Plaintiff:
David A Day
Defendant:
Jeffrey S Hughes, Michael Bertling and McLario Helm & Bertling SC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Barley v. Johnson et al
as 2:2011cv00050
Plaintiff:
Elmer L Barley
Defendant:
Gene Johnson, Eddie L. Pearson, D. Newcomer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hughes v. Astrue
as 3:2010cv00071
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
Debra S. Hughes
Interested Party:
SSA General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Richard Pickett v. Bennie Rollins, et al
as 10-17777
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD L. PICKETT
Defendant - Appellee:
BENNIE ROLLINS, Deputy Warden in his individual & official capacity, TERRY L. STEWART, Director, Director in his individual & official capacity, REED, CO III in her individual & official capacity and others
Day v. Hughes et al
as 2:2010cv00989
Plaintiff:
David A Day
Defendant:
Jeffrey S Hughes, Michael Bertling and McLario Helm Bertling SC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HUGHES v. HANKS
as 1:2010cv01420
Respondent:
CRAIG A. HANKS
Petitioner:
MARK S. HUGHES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
VANDOMMELEN v. MERCANTANTE et al
as 2:2010cv05484
Plaintiff:
ANNELIES VANDOMMELEN
Defendant:
CAROL MERCANTANTE, DAVID S. HUGHES and JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MEMORYLINK CORP V MOTOROLA
as 10-1533
Defendant-Appellee:
Hugh C. Dunlop, J. Ray Wood, Jonathan P. Meyer and others
Plaintiff-Appellant:
Memorylink Corp., Memorylink Corp., Memorylink Corp. and others
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.
