Cases 71 - 80 of 81
BOULDEN v. U.S. RUBBER COMPANY (UNIROYAL)
as 2:2009cv88777
Plaintiff:
JOE H. BOULDEN
Defendant:
U.S. RUBBER COMPANY (UNIROYAL)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
BOULDEN v. U.S. RUBBER COMPANY (UNIROYAL)
as PAE/2:09-CV-88777
Defendant:
U.S. RUBBER COMPANY (UNIROYAL)
Plaintiff:
BOULDEN
Boulden v. Janecka et al
as 1:2009cv00770
Plaintiff:
Donald A. Boulden
Defendant:
James Janecka and Attorney General of the State of New Mexico
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2008cv04213
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Whitehead et al v. Boulden, M.D. et al
as 2:2008cv02466
Plaintiff:
Carl Whitehead and Tracey Whitehead
Defendant:
Thomas F. Boulden, M.D., UT Medical Group, Inc. and Methodist Le Bonheur Healthcare
Cause Of Action: Diversity
ST.CLAIR v. CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP et al
as 1:2008cv01258
Plaintiff:
DONALD F. ST.CLAIR
Defendant:
CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, RBS CITIZENS, N.A., CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
ST. CLAIR v. CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP et al
as 1:2008cv01257
Plaintiff:
DONALD F. ST. CLAIR
Defendant:
CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, RBS CITIZENS, N.A., CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Boulden v. Froseth et al
as 3:2007cv00602
Plaintiff:
Randolph Wallace Boulden
Defendant:
Michael Froseth and Anthony Pucillo
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BOULDEN v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
as 1:2007cv04343
Plaintiff:
GEORGE W. BOULDEN
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv05658
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Debtor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BA
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.
