Cases 61 - 70 of 99
TERRELL v. R&L CARRIERS SHARED SERVICES, LLC et al
as 1:2019cv04276
Plaintiff:
MARK AND TERESA TERRELL, TERESA TERRELL and MARK TERRELL
Defendant:
R&L CARRIERS SHARED SERVICES, LLC and CANNON COCHRAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
DAVENPORT v. WARDEN
as 3:2019cv00152
Petitioner:
TERRELL DAVENPORT
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Sturgis v. Warden
as 3:2018cv00972
Respondent:
Warden
Petitioner:
Wilbert Terrell Sturgis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
TERRELL et al v. GUILLEN et al
as 1:2018cv03314
Defendant:
FIGUS TRUCKING, INC. and ENRIQUE GUILLEN
Plaintiff:
TERESA TERRELL and MARK TERRELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
JONES v. WEXFORD HEALTH CORPORATION et al
as 1:2018cv02648
Defendant:
J. KEDDER, N. CLAYNUM, L. DAWSON and others
Plaintiff:
MARIO TERRELL JONES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TERRELL v. COOK INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2018cv02134
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM TERRELL
Defendant:
COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL LLC and WILLIAM COOK EUROPE APS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ROBERTS et al v. CLARK COUNTY JAIL et al
as 4:2018cv00050
Defendant:
MAJOR SAM BEARD, CLARK COUNTY JAIL, DIRECTOR SCOTT CONLEN and others
Plaintiff:
TRAVIS M. JONES, SHAWN DRIE R. PRATT and TERRELL L. ROBERTS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DYSON v. COOK INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2018cv00585
Defendant:
COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL LLC and WILLIAM COOK EUROPE APS
Plaintiff:
DENNIS TERRELL DYSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
MEBANE v. WARDEN
as 2:2017cv00531
Petitioner:
JOSHUA TERRELL MEBANE
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
TERRELL v. WALMART STORES EAST, LP
as 4:2017cv00203
Plaintiff:
TARA LYNN TERRELL
Defendant:
WALMART STORES EAST, LP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
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.
