Cases 61 - 70 of 1,452
Sealy v. The United States of America et al
as 1:2023cv00645
Petitioner:
Dessalines Sealy
Respondent:
The United States of America, Ebonoluwa A. Taiwo, Timothy S. Mungan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Sullivan v. O'Malley et al.
as 1:2023cv01913
Plaintiff:
Donald Sullivan
Defendant:
Michael C. O'Malley, Judge Deborah M. Turner, Judge Wanda C. Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Fender
as 1:2023cv01866
Petitioner:
Lee Jones
Respondent:
Warden Douglas Fender
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv03019
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Jones v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv02950
Plaintiff:
Eugene Daniel Jones
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Easley v. Nolan et al
as 3:2023cv01756
Plaintiff:
David Easley
Defendant:
Aaron J. Nolan, Robia Jones-Barringer, Lucas County Jail and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Jones v. C.R. BARD,INC. et al
as 2:2023cv02851
Plaintiff:
Adam Jones
Defendant:
C.R. BARD,INC. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jones v. C.R. Bard, Inc et al
as 2:2023cv02783
Plaintiff:
Jamaal Jones
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc and Bard Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jones v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv02725
Plaintiff:
Tonja Jones
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jones v. Gray
as 4:2023cv01650
Petitioner:
Aaron L. Jones, Sr.
Respondent:
Warden David W. Gray
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
