Cases 1 - 10 of 988
Al-Barr v. Garrett
as 2:2024cv00063
Plaintiff:
Lord Judah Al-Barr
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Plunkett v. Ward et al
as 2:2023cv00122
Plaintiff:
Stephen Chris Plunkett and Stephen Christopher Plunkett
Defendant:
Timothy C Ward, Damon Henninger, William Danforth and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cothran v. Barr
as 3:2023cv00089
Plaintiff:
Clintell Cothran, Sr.
Defendant:
James Barr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Other Civil Rights
Abbott et al v. Walmart Inc
as 3:2021cv00188
Plaintiff:
Rebecca Abbott, Meagan Albert, Sophia Alfaro and others
Defendant:
Walmart Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Williams v. Barr et al
as 2:2021cv00060
Defendant:
M D Carvajal, Rosalez, Sheila S Woodard and others
Plaintiff:
LaJwhan Donnelle Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Boring v. Jones et al
as 6:2021cv06062
Plaintiff:
David Boring and David Baring
Defendant:
Prosecuting Attorney Trent Daniels, United States Senate, Nurse Betty Doe II and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Charles v. Jones et al
as 6:2021cv06058
Defendant:
Prosecuting Attorney Trent Daniels, United States Senate, Nurse Betty Doe II and others
Plaintiff:
David Charles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Novak, Jr. v. Jones et al
as 6:2021cv06055
Defendant:
Prosecuting Attorney Trent Daniels, United States Senate, Nurse Betty Doe II and others
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Novak, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Clayton v. Jones et al
as 6:2021cv06064
Defendant:
Prosecuting Attorney Trent Daniels, United States Senate, Nurse Betty Doe II and others
Plaintiff:
Rayson Clayton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Walker v. Jones et al
as 6:2021cv06065
Defendant:
Prosecuting Attorney Trent Daniels, United States Senate, Nurse Betty Doe II and others
Plaintiff:
Darius Walker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
