Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Bailey v. Oregon State Treasurer
as 3:2024cv00634
Plaintiff:
Charles Bailey
Defendant:
Oregon State Treasurer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Climate Change Truth, Inc. v. Bailey et al
as 3:2022cv00654
Plaintiff:
Climate Change Truth, Inc.
Defendant:
Judge Charles Bailey and Attorney Jim Shipley
Incorrectly Filed.
as 4:2021cv03523
Petitioner:
Raymond Charles Bailey, Jr. and Incorrectly Filed
Defendant:
Patrick Cooper and Texas Department Of Criminal Justice
Cause Of Action: 88 U.S.C. § 8888
Incorrectly Filed
as 4:2021cv03525
Defendant:
Raymond Charles Bailey, Jr., Bryan Collier, Texas Department Of Criminal Justice and others
Cause Of Action: 88 U.S.C. § 8888
Nancy Bailey v. OWCP
as 20-1075
Petitioner:
NANCY BAILEY, on behalf of CHARLES BAILEY
Respondent:
OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Director, United States Department of Labor
Houston v. Sheahan
as 19-1013
Defendant:
Charles Bailey, Individually, and a Prison Guard for Medical Department for Five Points C.F., O'Connor, Individually, and as Prison Guard Sergeant for Five Points C.F., Karen Bellamy, Individually, and as Director of Inmate Grievance Program ("IGP") for NYS DOCCS and others
Defendant / Appellee:
M. Mewar, Individually, and as Dentist for Five Points C.F.
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Tyrone Houston, AKA Tyrone Black
Bailey et al v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals U S A Inc et al
as LAW/6:13-cv-01657
Plaintiff:
Charles Bailey and Debra Bailey
Defendant:
Takeda Pharmaceuticals U S A Inc, Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc, Takeda Global Research & Development Center Inc and others
USA v. Charles Bailey
as 12-13599
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
CHARLES BAILEY, a.k.a. Charles Phillip Bailey, a.k.a. Champ
Richard Charles Bailey, et al. v. ACandS, Inc., et al.
as NYW/1:01-CV-00859
Plaintiff:
Richard Charles Bailey
Defendant:
ACandS, Inc
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.
