Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Hopkins v. Roughton et al
as 3:2024cv00222
Plaintiff:
Jesse Lee Hopkins
Defendant:
Lt. Roughton, Warden Barron, Collette Peters and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barron et al v. Extreme Products Group, LLC et al
as 3:2021cv00227
Plaintiff:
Brett Kelly Barron and Emily Barron
Defendant:
New Big 5 Corp., Extreme Products Group, LLC and Big 5 Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Barron v. Gana LLC et al
as 3:2020cv02181
Plaintiff:
Evaristo Barron
Defendant:
Young M. Cho and Gana LLC a domestic limited liability company doing business as Hawaiian Kine BBQ
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 207
Dean v. Smith et al
as 3:2018cv01926
Defendant:
Kingsley Smith, United States of America, Dr Cole and others
Plaintiff:
Fredric Russell Dean and Fredric R. Dean
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2016cv02147
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2015cv00432
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Fjerstad v. United States of America, et. al.
as 3:2014cv01305
Defendant:
Barron Bridgett, J. Calloway, Brian Clayton and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Fjerstad
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cheeseman v. Bennett et al
as 6:2014cv00865
Defendant:
Richard L. Barron, Teresa Bennett and Coos County Circuit Court
Plaintiff:
Robert Cheeseman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Everist v. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service et al
as 1:2014cv00199
Defendant:
Attorney General of the United States, Director Dayne Barron, City of Medford, Oregon and others
Plaintiff:
David D. Everist
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 183 Patent - Right to Compensation
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.
