Cases 61 - 70 of 169
Rufus Spearman v. Daniel Heyns, et al
as 17-1338
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RUFUS SPEARMAN, aka Rufus Lamar Savin Spearman
Defendant - Appellee:
DANIEL H. HEYNS, Director of the MDOC, RICHARD D. RUSSELL, Grievance Manager & Misconduct Hearings Administrator, UNKNOWN PART(Y)(IES), named as Kinross Complex Store, Jane Doe (Prisoner Store Employees) and others
Young v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
as 1:2017cv00036
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff:
Danielle Marie Young
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416
Young v. Johnson & Johnson et al
as 4:2016cv00286
Plaintiff:
Mary Young
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc., Imerys Talc America, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Richard Crowell v. Christopher Fiegel, et al
as 16-1468
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD CROWELL
Defendant - Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER FIEGEL, Corrections Officer and MARY YOUNG, Corrections Officer
Young v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2016cv01108
Plaintiff:
Mary Young
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Young v. Johnson & Johnson Inc et al
as 3:2015cv03064
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Inc and DePuy Orthopaedics Inc
Plaintiff:
Mary Young
Pecial_master:
Special Master
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv01356
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Young v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv01830
Plaintiff:
Dyana Marie Young
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Young v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv05122
Plaintiff:
Dyana Marie Young
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
YOUNG v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
as 1:2015cv00103
Plaintiff:
TERRA MARIE YOUNG
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
