Cases 61 - 70 of 72
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2011cv00179
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Malone v. Wyeth LLC
as 4:2010cv00831
Plaintiff:
William Malone
Defendant:
Wyeth LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Chatt et al v. West Memphis Arkansas, City of et al
as 3:2010cv00119
Plaintiff:
Rosie Chatt and Dewayne Chatt, Jr
Defendant:
West Memphis Arkansas, City of, Samuel Malone, Steven Jackson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Reed v. Malone's Mechanical, Inc. et al
as 2:2009cv02061
Plaintiff:
Michael - Reed
Defendant:
Malone's Mechanical, Inc., Michael Jacobs and Simmons Foods, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Winston v. Evans et al
as 5:2008cv00231
Plaintiff:
Eric Winston
Defendant:
Fred Evans, Lasaundra M Malone and Reed
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Malone v. Wyeth Inc et al
as 4:2008cv01416
Defendant:
Wyeth Inc, Wyeth Inc, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Ethel Malone, Ethel Malone, Ethel Malone and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Chatt et al v. West Memphis Arkansas, City of et al
as 3:2008cv00096
Plaintiff:
Rosie Mae Chatt, Rosie Mae Chatt, Dewayne Chatt, Jr and others
Defendant:
West Memphis Arkansas, City of, Samuel Malone, Steven Jackson and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Winston v. Gonda et al
as 5:2008cv00174
Plaintiff:
Eric Winston
Defendant:
Marshal Gonda, Micheal Hutchinson, Reed and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Diamond v. Pafordford Ambulance Service et al
as 2:2008cv00015
Plaintiff:
Curtis Malone Diamond, II
Defendant:
Pafordford Ambulance Service and Monte McIntosh
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Other Civil Rights
Malone v. Norris
as 5:2007cv00322
Plaintiff:
Anthony Careious Malone
Defendant:
Larry Norris
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.
