Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Parker et al v. Haer
as 1:2021cv04808
Plaintiff:
Paul C. Parker and General Business Solutions, Inc. doing business as Custom Graphics Printing
Defendant:
Arthur H. Haer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Blocker v. Parker-Smith et al
as 1:2021cv04736
Plaintiff:
Antonio Bernard Blocker
Defendant:
Yolanda C. Parker-Smith, Tabitha Pazmino and Craig Runyon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Parker v. United States
as 1:2019cv01238
Petitioner:
Edwin C. Parker
Respondent:
United States
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
United States of America v. Tree-Removal Rights With Respect To Land In Gordon County, Georgia et al
as 4:2016cv00341
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Tree-Removal Rights With Respect To Land In Gordon County, Georgia, Danny N. Parker and Rebecca C. Parker
Cause Of Action: 16 U.S.C. § 0831
Bryant v. Puhl et al
as 1:2016cv03712
Plaintiff:
Hattie Mae Bryant
Defendant:
Todd Puhl, Pamela Monroe, Mark Richts and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Vargas v. Nelms et al
as 1:2015cv02400
Plaintiff:
Ignacio Vargas
Defendant:
Jonathon C. Nelms, Christopher C. McEntyre, James M. Pyland, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gilbert et al v. Mowrey et al
as 1:2014cv01470
Plaintiff:
Elisha Gilbert, Jr. and Ayman Abdullah Latif
Defendant:
B. Mowrey , J. T. Williams , Corporal Unknown Name and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Parker v. Astrue
as 2:2011cv00266
Plaintiff:
Anthony C. Parker
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Parker v. United States of America
as 1:2009cv00976
Petitioner:
Edwin C. Parker
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
v. United States of America
as 1:2008cv02253
Movant:
Edwin C. Parker
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
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.
