Cases 41 - 50 of 1,123
Berry v. McLennan County, Texas et al
as 6:2023cv00636
Plaintiff:
Marvin Lovell Berry
Defendant:
McLennan County, Texas, Parnell McNamara, Ricky Armstrong and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BAUMAN v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2023cv08287
Plaintiff:
LYNNE BAUMAN
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC, LTL MANAGEMENT LLC and others
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES & PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2023cv01561
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv11721
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Parker #593090 v. Bauman et al
as 2:2023cv00128
Plaintiff:
Bruce Parker #593090
Defendant:
Catherine Bauman, D. Tasson, P. Hubble and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Reaves v. Bauman
as 2:2023cv11633
Defendant:
Attorney General of the State of Michigan
Respondent:
Warden Catherine S. Bauman
Petitioner:
Turon Jerome Reaves
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Smith #254471 v. Bauman
as 2:2023cv00110
Petitioner:
DeNeal Lee Smith #254471
Respondent:
Catherine S. Bauman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BAUMAN v. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V. et al
as 2:2023cv01084
Plaintiff:
JOHN LEE BAUMAN
Defendant:
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V., PHILIPS NORTH AMERICA LLC., PHILIPS HOLDING USA INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Leguire v. City of Findlay et al
as 3:2023cv01123
Plaintiff:
Matthias Leguire
Defendant:
The City of Findlay, Mayor Christina Muryn, Donald Rasmussen and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
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.
