Cases 81 - 90 of 110
CURRIE v. ZATECKY
as 1:2013cv01347
Petitioner:
CURRIE O'BRYANT
Respondent:
DUSHAN ZATECKY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CURRY v. CARAWAY
as 2:2013cv00286
Respondent:
CARAWAY
Petitioner:
DANIEL J. CURRY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
TAYLOR-BEY v. CARLISLE et al
as 1:2013cv01075
Defendant:
SHEILA A. CARLISLE, TERRY CURRY, LINDSAY GEDIG and others
Plaintiff:
TYREESE TAYLOR-BEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv00189
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Curry v. Fort Wayne City of et al
as 1:2013cv00173
Plaintiff:
Donte Curry
Defendant:
Fort Wayne City of, Michael Dickey and John Drummer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CURRY v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2013cv00183
Plaintiff:
DANIEL CURRY
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Curry v. Biomet, Inc. et al
as 3:2013cv00083
Plaintiff:
Dharla Jo Curry
Defendant:
Biomet Inc , Biomet Orthopedics LLC and Biomet US Reconstruction LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv00169
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
CURRY v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 2:2012cv00338
Petitioner:
NICHOLAS CURRY
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Artalejo et al v. Biomet Orthopedics LLC et al
as 3:2012cv00719
Plaintiff:
Jesus Artalejo , Tammy Brooke , Crystal Bryant and others
Defendant:
Biomet Orthopedics LLC , Biomet Inc and Biomet LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
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.
