Cases 61 - 70 of 105
Sykes v. Back et al
as 5:2015cv00268
Plaintiff:
Earl Theo Sykes
Defendant:
Brenda Back, Kelli Cunningham, Mike Hanson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Trammell v. White et al
as 5:2015cv00137
Plaintiff:
Joel Edward Trammell
Defendant:
Jared White, John Idlett, Nathan Cross and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Halley v. Oklahoma State Department of Human Services et al
as 6:2014cv00562
Plaintiff:
Frank Halley
Defendant:
Oklahoma State Department of Human Services , Sara Huckaby , Ken Golden and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Riley v. United States of America
as 5:2014cv01111
Movant:
Nathan Riley
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Heath v. Guardian Interlock Network Inc et al
as 5:2014cv01079
Plaintiff:
Nathan Heath
Defendant:
Guardian Interlock Network Inc and Guardian Interlock Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2014cv00825
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Catalog.com Inc v. Softlayer Technologies Inc et al
as 5:2014cv00658
Plaintiff:
Catalog.com Inc
Defendant:
Softlayer Technologies Inc, Matt Chilek, Nathan Day and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Property Damage
Barber v. Whetsel et al
as 5:2014cv00454
Plaintiff:
Nathan Lee Barber, Jr
Defendant:
John Whetsel and Armour Correctional Health Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Barber v. Whetsel et al
as 5:2014cv00455
Petitioner:
Nathan Lee Barber, Jr
Respondent:
John Whetsel and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Chancler et al v. Lamplight Farms, Incorporated et al
as 4:2014cv00157
Plaintiff:
Nathan Chancler and Stephanie Goldagi
Defendant:
Lamplight Farms, Incorporated , W.C. Bradley Co , Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
