Cases 51 - 60 of 167
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv00108
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1401
The Estate of Casey Teskoski v. Wood County
as 3:2019cv00095
Plaintiff:
The Estate of Casey Teskoski
Defendant:
Wood County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
The Estate of Trequelle Tyreke Vann-Marcouex v. Wood County
as 3:2019cv00094
Plaintiff:
The Estate of Trequelle Tyreke Vann-Marcouex
Defendant:
Wood County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cunningham v. Wood County et al
as 6:2019cv00018
Plaintiff:
Brandie Cunningham
Defendant:
Thomas castloo and Wood County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Myers v. Wood County
as 3:2018cv02972
Defendant:
Wood County
Plaintiff:
Craig R. Myers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shawn Dunn v. Texas Governor, et al
as 18-50632
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SHAWN DUNN
Defendant - Appellee:
TEXAS GOVERNOR, TEXAS TRIAL JUDGES, TEXAS COUNTY COURTS and others
Coss v. Blatt et al
as 2:2018cv01199
Defendant:
D. B. Cross, William A. Blatt and Wood County Sheriff's Department
Plaintiff:
Brandon Matthew Coss
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dunn v. Texas Governor et al
as 6:2018cv00182
Defendant:
GRANBURY TX., HOOD COUNTY, EL PASO TX., EL PASO COUNTY, HOUSTON, TX. HARRIS COUNTY and others
Plaintiff:
Shawn Dunn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Sprint Communications Co. LP v. The Stoutland Telephone Co., et al
as 18-10826
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P.
Defendant - Appellee:
THE STOUTLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY, AMHERST TELEPHON COMPANY, CHEQUAMEGON COMMINCATIONS COOPERATIVE INCORPORATED and others
MCI Communications Services, et al v. Amelia Telephone Corporation, et al
as 18-10787
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INCORPORATED and VERIZON SELECT SERVICES INCORPORATED
Defendant - Appellee:
AMELIA TELEPHONE CORPORATION, ARVIG TELEPHON COMPANY, BADGER TELECOM INCORPORATED 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.
