Cases 31 - 40 of 10,017
Liscomb v. Randel et al
as 4:2024cv00296
Plaintiff:
Michael Allen Liscomb
Defendant:
Kenyen Randel, Antonio D Johnson, Jr, Tod Ball and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Stange
as 1:2024cv00068
Petitioner:
Antione Johnson
Defendant:
Bill Stange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00232
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Painters District Council No. 58 et al v. D. Johnson Painting LLC et al
as 4:2024cv00482
Plaintiff:
Painters District Council No. 58, Carl Farrell, St. Louis Painters Pension Trust and others
Defendant:
D. Johnson Painting LLC and D'Von Johnson
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Ricky Tigue, Jr. v. Belcher, et al
as 24-1669
Plaintiff:
Ricky Lynn Tigue, Jr.
Defendant:
Belcher, RN, EARU, ADC, Gary Kerstein, EARU, ADC, Kelley, Lt., EARU, ADC and others
Rene Valdivia, et al v. Derek Porsch, et al
as 24-1668
Plaintiff:
Rene Valdivia and Alexis Free
Defendant:
Derek Porsch, Gabriel Christensen, Derick Seaton and others
Clyde Johnson, II v. United States, et al
as 24-1644
Plaintiff:
Clyde Bernard Johnson, II
Defendant:
United States of America, Stephanie Swords, Doctor, USMCFP, Collins, Doctor, USMCFP and others
Johnson v. Stahl et al
as 0:2024cv01065
Plaintiff:
Paul Edward Johnson
Defendant:
Kevin Stahl, Tyler Johnson and Kevin Lease
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Johnson v. O'Malley
as 2:2024cv04042
Plaintiff:
Donald B. Johnson
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Johnson v. O'Malley
as 0:2024cv01059
Plaintiff:
Ryan Johnson
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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.
