Cases 71 - 80 of 108
Vaughan v. National Guard Bureau et al
as 3:2012cv00034
Plaintiff:
Michael Dean Vaughan
Defendant:
National Guard Bureau and Ky Army National Guard
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Vaughan v. Ky Army National Guard et al
as 3:2012cv00033
Plaintiff:
Michael Dean Vaughan
Defendant:
Ky Army National Guard and United States Department of the Army
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Vaughan v. Ky Army National Guard et al
as 3:2012cv00035
Plaintiff:
Michael Dean Vaughan
Defendant:
Ky Army National Guard and United States Department of the Army
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fay v. Arizona Army National Guard et al
as 2:2012cv01079
Petitioner:
William P Fay
Respondent:
Arizona Army National Guard, Hugo Salazar, Ellen Reilly and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
VAUGHAN v. KY ARMY NATIONAL GUARD et al
as 1:2012cv00710
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL DEAN VAUGHAN
Defendant:
KY ARMY NATIONAL GUARD and UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
VAUGHAN v. NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU et al
as 1:2012cv00476
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL DEAN VAUGHAN
Defendant:
NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU and KY ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv01476
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Frederick Aikens v. William Ingram, Jr.
as 12-1334
Plaintiff - Appellant:
FREDERICK AIKENS
Defendant - Appellee:
WILLIAM E. INGRAM, JR., individually and in his capacity as Adjutant General of the North Carolina Army National Guard and PETER VON JESS, individually and in his capacity as Lieutenant Colonel of the North Carolina National Guard
VAUGHAN v. KY ARMY NATIONAL GUARD et al
as 1:2012cv00364
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL DEAN VAUGHAN
Defendant:
KY ARMY NATIONAL GUARD and UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv01154
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
