Cases 1 - 10 of 13,528
Cantu-Cox v. USA
as 2:2024cv01124
Petitioner:
Christopher Cantu-Cox
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate
Cantu-Cox v. USA
as 2:2024cv01125
Petitioner:
Carlos Mario Cantu-Cox
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate
Cox, Jr. v. Superintendent of SCI-Houtzdale et al
as 1:2024cv00743
Petitioner:
Vernon Andre Cox, Jr.
Respondent:
Superintendent of SCI-Houtzdale and Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
United States of America v. Best (Cox)
as 24-1188
Defendant:
WALLACE BEST, JEFFREY THOMAS, OSCAR GARCIA-HERNANDEZ and others
Not Yet Classified:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cox, et al. v. Association of Oregon Corrections Employees, Inc., et al.
as 24-2763
Defendant:
COLETTE S. PETERS, in her official capacity as the Director of Oregon Department of Corrections, ASSOCIATION OF OREGON CORRECTIONS EMPLOYEES, INC., OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES and others
Plaintiff:
TRACY COX, MARK COX, YVONNE WILLIAMS and others
Michael Dobson v. Dr. Thompson
as 24-6403
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL DOBSON
Defendant:
DR. THOMPSON, HAROLD W. CLARKE, STEVEN HERRICK and others
COX v. ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD.
as 1:2024cv21667
Plaintiff:
SAVANNAH COX
Defendant:
ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1333 Admiralty
Morales v. AZ Painting & Consulting LLC et al
as 2:2024cv00978
Plaintiff:
Artemio Morales
Defendant:
AZ Painting & Consulting LLC, Marianne Cox and Unknown Cox
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2024cv00043
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Phillips v. Staton et al
as 3:2024cv00352
Plaintiff:
Victor D Phillips, Jr
Defendant:
Brock M. Staton, M Lester and M Cox
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.
