Cases 1 - 10 of 19
Priest v. Doe et al
as 3:2022cv00064
Plaintiff:
Thomas Priest
Defendant:
Superintendent John Doe and City Of Chesapeake
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Bivens Prisoner
Priest v. DBI Services, LLC
as 3:2021cv00712
Plaintiff:
Kevin Priest
Defendant:
DBI Services, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2101
Sirleaf v. Doe et al
as 7:2021cv00237
Plaintiff:
Priest Momolu V.S. Sirleaf and Monolu Sacker Sirleaf
Defendant:
Emma S. Urey, Jimmy Doe and Counselor Matiangai Arnett
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Sirleaf v. Edmonds
as 3:2021cv00267
Petitioner:
Priest Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr.
Respondent:
L. Edmonds
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Priest et al v. Harris et al
as 7:2021cv00174
Plaintiff:
Mary Eleanor Priest and James Harold Priest
Defendant:
Brandon David Harris and Big Fam Enterprises, L.L.C.
Respondent:
Virginia Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. Co, Erie Insurance Exchange and Erie Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Priest et al v. Allied Property And Casualty Insurance Company
as 3:2020cv00080
Plaintiff:
Manli Priest and Lusi Wei
Defendant:
Allied Property And Casualty Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Sirleaf v. Clarke et al
as 3:2019cv00710
Defendant:
Harold Clarke, Captain Wright, D.Y. Kinsley and others
Plaintiff:
Priest Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sirleaf v. Amor Correctional Health Service$ Inc. et al
as 3:2019cv00711
Defendant:
Doctor Gore, Lynda Burrows, Does 1-7 and others
Plaintiff:
Priest Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sirleaf, Jr v. Armor Correctional Health Services, Inc. et al
as 3:2019cv00529
Defendant:
Doe #7, Doe #3, Doe #2 and others
Plaintiff:
Priest Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sirleaf v. Northam et al
as 3:2019cv00182
Defendant:
Mark Herring, United States, Roderick C. Young and others
Plaintiff:
Priest Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr.
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.
