Cases 41 - 50 of 2,622
Anderson v. The State of North Carolina et al
as 1:2024cv00034
Plaintiff:
Andrew D. Anderson
Defendant:
The State of North Carolina, The Office of the Governor of North Carolina, Roy Cooper, III and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Beasley v. FuboTV, Inc.
as 1:2024cv00711
Plaintiff:
Catherine Beasley
Defendant:
FuboTV, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 271
Charlton Beasley v. USA
as 24-5092
Petitioner:
CHARLTON BEASLEY
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Long v. Beasley et al
as 6:2024cv00003
Plaintiff:
Dennis Long
Defendant:
Jacob Beasley, DW McFarland, Lt. Wright and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jackson v. Beasley
as 1:2024cv00384
Petitioner:
Jaramus Sharrod Jackson
Respondent:
Jacob Beasley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Beasley v. Exactech Inc et al
as 1:2024cv00562
Plaintiff:
Donna Beasley
Defendant:
Exactech Inc and Exactech, U.S., Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Ates et al v. 3M Company
as 2:2024cv00392
Defendant:
3M Company, Du Pont De Nemours Inc, UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation Inc and others
Plaintiff:
James L Ates, Ronald Abrantes, Kendra Tennille Abron and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal-Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00352
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Walter Beasley v. T. Peyton
as 24-6047
Plaintiff:
MR. WALTER RAY BEASLEY
Defendant:
MRS. T. PEYTON, Kitchen Supervisor, MR. LARRY LEABOUGH, Head Superintendent, MR. MARK CULVER, Lieutenant and others
MCKISSIC v. RAWLEY et al
as 7:2024cv00003
Plaintiff:
CARLTON MCKISSIC
Defendant:
C RAWLING, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and JACOB BEASLEY
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.
