Cases 1 - 10 of 185
Perpinan, Alberto A. v. Jenkins et al
as 1:2024cv21769
Plaintiff:
Alberto Abdel Perpinan
Defendant:
Asharell Jenkins, J. Dominguez, Mantencon R. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State Prisoner Civil Rights
Todd et al v. Parker
as 0:2024cv60446
Plaintiff:
Lindsey Todd, Stefanie Ann Borges, Jordan Steele Vance and others
Defendant:
Charles W. Parker
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Drummond v. Lim et al
as 3:2024cv00071
Plaintiff:
Charles W. Drummond
Defendant:
C. Lim, Lt. Jackson, Dr. Lee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DRUMMOND v. LIM et al
as 3:2024cv00027
Plaintiff:
CHARLES W DRUMMOND
Defendant:
C LIM, OFFICER JACKSON, LEE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HOYLE v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2023cv03079
Plaintiff:
CHARLES W HOYLE
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Cook v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (St. Johns)
as 3:2023cv00711
Petitioner:
Charles W. Cook and Charles W. Cook, III
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
REED v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv10961
Plaintiff:
CHARLES W. REED, JR.
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
COLEMAN v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv09392
Plaintiff:
CHARLES W. COLEMAN
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
ARMOUR v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv02228
Plaintiff:
CHARLES W. ARMOUR, JR. and CHARLES W ARMOUR, JR
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
STOKES v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv25063
Plaintiff:
CHARLES W STOKES and CHARLES W STOKES, JR
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
