Cases 1 - 10 of 656
Reynolds v. Sudman et al
as 4:2024cv01920
Plaintiff:
Loren-Michael Reynolds
Defendant:
Harry Shiel Sudman, Greg D Porter, Rodriguez & Porter, LTD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv01871
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination
Bailey v. Albright
as 6:2024cv00240
Plaintiff:
Markiesha (Mark) Bailey
Defendant:
Judge Alan D. Albright
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bailey v. Paxton
as 6:2024cv00236
Plaintiff:
Markiesha (Mark) Bailey
Defendant:
Ken Paxton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Putin v. Deco 969 et al
as 4:2024cv00388
Plaintiff:
Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Putin and Lakeshia Edmond
Defendant:
Deco 969, Truist Bank, Haltom Jewelry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ackerman et al v. Arkema Inc.
as 4:2024cv01588
Plaintiff:
Dorothy Ackerman, Mary Ackerman, Sylbestre Aburto and others
Defendant:
Arkema Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Baxter Bailey & Associates, Inc. v. Lineage Logistics PFS, LLC et al
as 4:2024cv00891
Plaintiff:
Baxter Bailey & Associates, Inc.
Defendant:
Lineage Logistics PFS, LLC, Apex Logistics Solutions LLC, Agrumi Produce LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 11707 Carmack Amendment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00551
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Bailey v. Matz
as 6:2024cv00055
Plaintiff:
Mark Charles Bailey
Defendant:
T. Matz
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bailey v. Scott et al
as 6:2024cv00111
Plaintiff:
Mark Charles Bailey
Defendant:
FNU Scott, FNU Parker, Administration and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
