Cases 61 - 70 of 81
Slepoy v. Borman
as 12-1234
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Yakov Slepoy
Defendant - Appellee:
Joseph Broytman, Racketeer, Marina Kogan, Mortgage Fraud Criminal, Mark Kogan, Mortgage Broker and link to Italian Mafia and others
Slepoy v. Borman et al
as 1:2012cv00600
Plaintiff:
Yakov Slepoy
Defendant:
Vladimir Borman, Joseph Broytman, Marina Kogan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Miller et al v. The City of Schenectady et al
as 1:2012cv00012
Plaintiff:
Robin Miller and Mark A. Miller
Defendant:
The City of Schenectady, Schenectady Police Department, John N. Favata and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
USA v. Luther Miller, Jr.
as 11-11225
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
LUTHER ROBIN MILLER, JR.
Giffen v. West Virginia Division of Corrections et al
as 2:2011cv00391
Plaintiff:
Bradley J. Giffen
Defendant:
West Virginia Division of Corrections , West Virginia Parole Board , Huttonsville Correctional Center and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas Hawkins, III v. State of California, et al
as 10-56225
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS HAWKINS, III
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA and ROBIN MILLER SLAON
Thomas Hawkins, III v. State of California et al
as 2:2010cv05292
Plaintiff:
Thomas Hawkins, III
Defendant:
Judge Robin Miller Sloan, State of California and Superior Court of California
Andrew Wenmoth v. Ovid Duncan, Jr.
as 10-6073
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANDREW D. WENMOTH
Defendant - Appellee:
OVID WESLEY DUNCAN, JR., Librarian, LARRY MCBRIDE, Correctional Officer II, KENNY AIKENS, Correctional Hearing Officer and others
Andrew Wenmoth v. Ovid Duncan, Jr.
as 09-7826
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANDREW D. WENMOTH
Defendant - Appellee:
OVID WESLEY DUNCAN, JR., Librarian, LARRY MCBRIDE, Correctional Officer II, KENNY AIKENS, Correctional Hearing Officer and others
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.
