Cases 61 - 70 of 93
Miller v. Bradford et al
as 3:2014cv01372
Plaintiff:
Ricky Miller
Defendant:
Kevin R Bradford, Douglas J. Jacobs, Raymond J Tonkin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ANDREWS v. MCDONOUGH et al
as 2:2014cv03930
Plaintiff:
JACQUELYN ANDREWS
Defendant:
ALEXANDRA MCDONOUGH , JOHN DOE OR JANE DOES NO. 1 and JOHN DOE OR JANE DOES NO. 2
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2014cv03784
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
BUTLER v. LAMONT et al
as 5:2014cv03733
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY BUTLER
Defendant:
CONRAD LAMONT, JOHN/JANE DOE GUARDS #1-X, JOHN/JANE DOE SUPERVISORS #1-X and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
OXSHEER et al v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, INC. et al
as 2:2014cv02391
Plaintiff:
GEORGE ROBERT OXSHEER, JR. and VIRGINIA LEE OXSHEER
Defendant:
ABBOTT LABORATORIES, INC., ABBVIE INC., AUXILIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
AMERSON et al v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, INC. et al
as 2:2014cv02206
Plaintiff:
BENJAMIN LEWIS AMERSON, JR. and RHONDA AMERSON
Defendant:
ABBOTT LABORATORIES, INC., ABBVIE INC., AUXILIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GROWTHWEAVER, LLC v. DIGITAL FIRST MEDIA, INC. et al
as 2:2014cv02101
Plaintiff:
GROWTHWEAVER, LLC
Defendant:
DIGITAL FIRST MEDIA, INC. and JOHN AND JANE DOES NOS. 1-10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv00266
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2014cv00256
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2013cv05497
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
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.
