Cases filed in Michigan
Cases 1 - 10 of 885
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv12485
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
Jones v. Douglas
as 4:2024cv12422
Petitioner: Dexter Carl Jones
Respondent: Adam Douglas
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Martin v. Douglas
as 2:2024cv12366
Respondent: Adam Douglas
Petitioner: Owen Oron Martin
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Chapman v. Douglas
as 2:2024cv12303
Petitioner: Jerell L. Chapman
Respondent: Adam Douglas
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Douglas v. Warner et al
as 4:2024cv12305
Plaintiff: Larry Douglas
Defendant: N. Kurish, Jared Warner and R. Buhl
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Winn v. Macomb, Township of et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2024cv12258
Defendant: Douglas P. Sherherd, Macomb, Township of, Tim Tomlinson and others
Plaintiff: Clayvion Clever Winn
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Taylor et al v. Hodge, et al
as 2:2024cv00145
Defendant: Cole Hodge, Michael Tulppo, Curt Harrington and others
Plaintiff: Douglas Richard Taylor, Jr. and Jessica Sue Taylor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Heckaman v. King
as 1:2024cv00835
Petitioner: Douglas Lee Heckaman
Respondent: Warden Chris King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hardy et al v. National Association of Realtors et al
as 2:2024cv12102
Defendant: RealComp II, Michigan Association of Realtors, North Oakland County Board of Realtors and others
Plaintiff: Douglas H Hardy, Dylan Tent and Glenn Champion
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Anti-trust
Jones #603497 v. Douglas We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2024cv00826
Respondent: Adam Douglas
Petitioner: Dexter Carl Jones #603497
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

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.


Why Is My Information Online?