Cases 1 - 10 of 722
Pham et al v. Occidental Fire & Casualty Company of North Carolina
as 4:2024cv01875
Plaintiff:
Xuan Pham and Dai Pham
Defendant:
Occidental Fire & Casualty Company of North Carolina
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Avist v. Day et al
as 2:2024cv01185
Plaintiff:
Christopher Avist
Defendant:
Travis Day
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-30123
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Mann v. Mayorkas
as 6:2024cv00200
Defendant:
Thapeloe John, Jeff Isabella, Alejandro Mayorkas and others
Plaintiff:
Thomas Mann, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Anderson v. Day
as 2:2024cv00873
Plaintiff:
Donald Arthur Anderson
Defendant:
Travis Day
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Graves v. Day et al
as 3:2024cv00279
Plaintiff:
Steffon Graves
Defendant:
Unknown Day, Cathy Fontenot, Sid Gautreau and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ometu v. City of San Antonio
as 24-50152
Plaintiff:
Mathias Ometu
Defendant:
City of San Antonio, William McManus, Chief of Police, Devin Day, Officer, Badge # 0490 and others
Clark v. Dept of Public Safety
as 24-30201
Plaintiff:
Torriana Clark
Defendant:
Department of Public Safety and Corrections, State of Louisiana, Lance Wallace, Sergeant and Travis Day, Warden
Bickham v. Day et al
as 1:2024cv00046
Plaintiff:
Tony D. Bickham
Defendant:
Mississippi Department of Correction Probation and Parole, Travis Day and Lynn Fitch
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ross v. Day et al
as 2:2024cv00740
Plaintiff:
Frederick Ross
Defendant:
Travis Day
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
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.
