Cases 1 - 10 of 17
McCurry v. Stoneybrooke Investors LLC
as 2:2024cv00082
Plaintiff:
Agness McCurry
Defendant:
Stoneybrooke Investors LLC
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Agness McCurry, et alIn re: Agness McCurry, et al
as 24-5405
Petitioner:
In re: AGNESS MCCURRY and ETHA JONES
Agness McCury, et al v. Thomas Wright, et al
as 24-5208
Plaintiff:
ETHA JONES and AGNESS MCCURRY
Defendant:
JUDGE THOMAS J. WRIGHT, BENJAMIN CURTIS MCCURRY, KELLY J. MCCURRY and others
Agness McCurry, et al v. Thomas Wright, et al
as 24-5196
Plaintiff:
ETHA JONES and AGNESS MCCURRY
Defendant:
JUDGE THOMAS J. WRIGHT, BENJAMIN CURTIS MCCURRY, KELLY J. MCCURRY and others
Agness McCurry v. Travis McDonough, et al
as 23-6055
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AGNESS MCCURRY
Defendant / Appellee:
TRAVIS RANDALL MCDONOUGH, Judge, KENNY W. ARMSTRONG, Judge, ANDY D. BENNETT, Judge and others
Agness McCurry v. D. Thomas, Jr., et al
as 23-6053
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AGNESS MCCURRY
Defendant / Appellee:
D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., Senior Judge, JOSEPH P. AHILLEN, Senior Assistant Attorney General, ROGER A. PAGE, Justice and others
McCurry et al v. Mccurry et al
as 2:2023cv00141
Plaintiff:
Agness McCurry and Etha Jones
Defendant:
Benjamin Curtis Mccurry, Gary McCurry, Cindy McCurry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Agness McCurry, et al v. Thomas Wright, et al
as 23-5929
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ETHA JONES and AGNESS MCCURRY
Defendant / Appellee:
JUDGE THOMAS J. WRIGHT, BENJAMIN CURTIS MCCURRY, KELLY J. MCCURRY and others
McCurry v. McDonough et al
as 3:2023cv00367
Plaintiff:
Agness McCurry
Defendant:
Travis McDonough, Kenny Armstrong, Andy Bennett and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
McCurry v. Thomas et al
as 2:2023cv00130
Plaintiff:
Agness McCurry
Defendant:
D Kelly Thomas, Joseph Ahillen, Roger Page and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
