Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Dean v. Lim et al
as 1:2024cv00020
Defendant:
Ofc./Sgt. Readon, FSS Lim, Sgt. Smith and others
Plaintiff:
Edward Lee Dean
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Kelly (ID 61483) v. Schnurr et al
as 5:2023cv03142
Plaintiff:
Terrance J. Kelly
Defendant:
Dan Schnurr, Fred C. Early, John C. Cannon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Early v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
as 3:2023cv20115
Plaintiff:
Alvin C. Early
Defendant:
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim USA Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Supreme Ackbar v. Christopher Monaco
as 20-6872
Defendant / Appellee:
K. CONRAD, C. EARLY, RIVERA LOPEZ and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SUPREME RAHEEM ACKBAR, a/k/a Ronald Gary
Supreme Ackbar v. Christopher Monaco
as 19-7498
Defendant / Appellee:
K. CONRAD, BRYAN STIRLING, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SUPREME RAHEEM ACKBAR, a/k/a Ronald Gary, #275886
Ackbar v. Monaco et al
as 4:2019cv01373
Plaintiff:
Supreme Raheem Ackbar and Ronald Gary
Defendant:
Henery McMasters, C. Early, Steven McCarthy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dyke v. Mackie et al
as 6:2016cv00279
Plaintiff:
Roger Allen Dyke
Defendant:
Bernard Mackie, Michael McCall, Larry Cartledge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 9:2014cv81310
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
US v. Charles Early
as 14-4207
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
CHARLES EARLY, a/k/a C-Early
Baccus v. Sterling et al
as 9:2014cv00429
Plaintiff:
John Roosevelt Baccus
Defendant:
Brian Sterling, Tamara Conwell, Nancy C Merchant and others
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.
