Cases 71 - 80 of 85
Rouse v. State of Maryland et al
as 1:2013cv02594
Petitioner:
William Curtis Rouse
Respondent:
State of Maryland and The Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Campbell v. Astrue
as 2:2012cv00040
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Plaintiff:
William Curtis Campbell, Jr.
Interested Party:
SSA General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Addington et al v. Zahn et al
as 4:2012cv03070
Plaintiff:
William Curtis Addington and Intellibind Technologies, LLC
Defendant:
Dale Zahn and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401 IRS: Tax Liability
Addington v. Addington
as 4:2012cv01090
Defendant:
Teresita D Addington
Plaintiff:
William Curtis Addington
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
WILSON et al v. THE CELOTEX CORPORATION et al
as 2:2011cv63714
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM CURTIS WILSON
Defendant:
THE CELOTEX CORPORATION , GAF CORPORATION, OWENS CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CURTIS et al v. BORG-WARNER CORPORATION et al
as 5:2010cv02863
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM CURTIS and CAROL CURTIS
Defendant:
BORG-WARNER CORPORATION, BRAKE SYSTEMS, INC., GENUINE PARTS COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
US v. William Hope
as 10-4620
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
WILLIAM CURTIS HOPE
Minter v. Certainteed Corporation
as 2:2009cv02520
Plaintiff:
William Curtis Minter, II
Defendant:
Certainteed Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2009cv02223
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
Slone v. The Sheriff of Polk County of Polk County et al
as 8:2009cv01175
Plaintiff:
Gina Slone and Gina Slone
Defendant:
The Sheriff of Polk County of Polk County, William Curtis Galloway, Gordon E. Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
