Cases 61 - 70 of 158
James Tomala v. Troy Davis, et al
as 10-17913
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES THOMAS TOMALA
Defendant - Appellee:
TROY DAVIS, W. SEMSEN, IVAN D. CLAY and others
Roderick Nunley v. George Lombardi, et al
as 10-3302
Plaintiff:
Earl Ringo, Jr., John C. Middleton, Russell Bucklew and others
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Roderick Nunley
Defendant - Appellee:
George A. Lombardi, Steve Larkins and John Doe
Campbell v. Clay, et al
as 1:2010cv01914
Petitioner:
Maurice Edward Campbell
Respondent:
I. D. Clay, Matthew Martel , Frank X. Chavez and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Earl Ringo, Jr., et al v. George Lombardi, et al
as 10-8024
Respondent:
Earl Ringo, Jr., John C. Middleton, Russell Bucklew and others
Petitioner:
George A. Lombardi, Steve Larkins and John Doe
Myron Butler v. UTMB, et al
as 10-20482
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MYRON ELDON BUTLER
Defendant - Appellee:
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH, O.L. Luther Unit and D. CLAY, Assistant Warden, Luther Unit
DANIEL et al v. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP et al
as 2:2010cv68794
Plaintiff:
JOHN W DANIEL and WILLA D CLAY DANIEL
Defendant:
OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP , PITTSBURGH CORNING CORPORATION , UNITED STATES MINERAL PRODUCTS COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Harrison v. Clay et al
as 2:2010cv01327
Plaintiff:
Stacy Leshun Harrison
Defendant:
Suzette D Clay and John Anthony
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Khalafala Khalafala v. Kramer, et al
as 10-16165
Petitioner:
KHALAFALA MOHAMED KHALAFALA, AKA Khalafa M. Khalafala
Respondent - Appellee:
KRAMER, Director of CDC, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA and IVAN D. CLAY, Warden
Myron Butler v. UTMB, et al
as 10-20252
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MYRON ELDON BUTLER
Defendant - Appellee:
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH, O.L. Luther Unit and D. CLAY, Assistant Warden, Luther Unit
Ivan Serrano v. Ivan Clay
as 10-55490
Petitioner - Appellant:
IVAN SERRANO
Respondent - Appellee:
IVAN D. CLAY, Prison Warden
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.
