Cases 71 - 80 of 247
Walker v. United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons et al
as 6:2017cv00347
Plaintiff:
Kennedy Walker
Defendant:
United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, FMC Lexington, Chaney and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
CARAKER v. OCULAR THERAPEUTIX, INC. et al
as 1:2017cv12146
Plaintiff:
DYLAN CARAKER
Defendant:
OCULAR THERAPEUTIX, INC. , AMARPREET SAWHNEY , George Migausky and others
Movant:
Osi Peters , Glenn Stephenson , Ocular Investor Group and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Stephen v. Jump
as 2:2017cv00094
Petitioner:
Aaron L. Stephen
Respondent:
Neal Jump
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Stephen v. Austin et al
as 2:2017cv00093
Plaintiff:
Aaron L. Stephen
Defendant:
Randy Austin, Ron Corbitt, Ann LeMieux and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Damon Stephens
as 17-1755
Petitioner:
In re: DAMON L. STEPHENS
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
In re: Damon Stephen
as 17-1755
Movant:
In re: DAMON L. STEPHENS
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STEPHENS v. COOK INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2017cv02021
Defendant:
COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL LLC and WILLIAM COOK EUROPE APS
Plaintiff:
BERRY L. STEPHENS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Stephens v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2017cv00577
Plaintiff:
Danny L. Stephens
Defendant:
3M Company and Arizant Healthcare, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
KADAMOVAS v. CARAWAY et al
as 2:2017cv00050
Defendant:
MELISSA BAYLESS, CAPTAIN, JOHN CARAWAY and others
Recruited Counsel:
ONI N. HARTON, JOHN MALEY and LADENE MENDOZA
Plaintiff:
JURIJUS KADAMOVAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Farley et al v. DeKalb County Police Department et al
as 1:2016cv02754
Plaintiff:
James D. Farley, Jr. and Linda Cherry
Defendant:
DeKalb County Police Department, Cedric L. Alexander, J. L. Stephens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
