Cases 51 - 60 of 156
NAILL v. OBAMA et al
as 3:2015cv00142
Plaintiff:
BILLY RAY NAILL
Defendant:
BARACK OBAMA, NATIONAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, MR. WENTZEL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Joaquin Foy v. The Super-Rich Members of the, et al
as 15-2174
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOAQUIN FOY
Defendant - Appellee:
THE SUPER-RICH MEMBERS OF THE ILLUMINATI, (Bilderberg Group), B.R. JETT, Hon. Warden, et a., POPE and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv00310
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BANKS et al v. NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2015cv00654
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK BANKS and KENNETH POSNER
Defendant:
NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT, OFFICER DANIEL PANTALEO, HON. JOY FLOWERS CONTI and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
CHUGHTAI v. OBAMA et al
as 2:2015cv00352
Plaintiff:
GUL M. CHUGHTAI
Defendant:
BARACK OBAMA and DEBORAH LEE JAMES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv00014
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Banks v. McCafferty et al
as 1:2014cv01234
Plaintiff:
Frederick Banks
Defendant:
Landya McCafferty, Joseph N. Laplante, Steven J. McAuliffe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TRICOME v. BARLIEB et al
as 2:2014cv04461
Plaintiff:
DOMENIC TRICOME
Defendant:
ETHAN BARLIEB, BEAU BIDEN, JOSEPH FARRELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BANKS v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY et al
as 1:2014cv04569
Petitioner:
FREDERICK BANKS
Respondent:
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY , US COURT OF APPEALS 3RD CIRCUIT , JIM BRENNAN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
TSARNAEV v. BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 2:2014cv00766
Petitioner:
DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV
Respondent:
BUREAU OF PRISONS and BARACK OBAMA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
