Cases 71 - 80 of 128
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2013cv02069
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Solomon v. Kess-Lewis et al
as 1:2013cv01952
Plaintiff:
Cargyle Brown Solomon
Defendant:
Shareese Kess-Lewis and Randolph T. Lewis
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3731 Fraud
Randolph v. Powercomm Construction, Inc. et al
as 8:2013cv01696
Plaintiff:
Gregory Randolph
Defendant:
Powercomm Construction, Inc. and David Kwasnik, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv01638
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Randolph v. Gansler et al
as 1:2013cv01367
Plaintiff:
Catherine Denise Randolph
Defendant:
Douglas Gansler and William Brockman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Randolph v. USA - 2255
as 1:2013cv01227
Plaintiff:
Mark Linn Randolph
Defendant:
USA - 2255
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Thorton et al v. Maryland General Hospital, Inc.
as 1:2013cv00162
Plaintiff:
Denise Thorton , Adrian Miles and Keith Randolph
Defendant:
Maryland General Hospital, Inc. , Dana Lee, M.D. and Harold T. Rowson
Thirdparty_plaintiff:
Maryland General Hospital, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Medical Malpractice
Michigan Commerce Bank v. Decisive Media, Inc. et al
as 8:2013cv00054
Plaintiff:
Michigan Commerce Bank
Defendant:
Decisive Media, Inc., Urban Wheel Awards and Randolph R. Peyton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Randolph v. Colvin
as 1:2013cv00038
Plaintiff:
Tiffany Randolph
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2012cv01590
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 791
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.
