Cases 1 - 10 of 50
Chism v. 3M Company et al
as 3:2024cv00814
Plaintiff:
Earnestine Chism
Defendant:
3M Company and Arizant Healthcare Inc
Howell v. State of Mississippi et al
as 1:2024cv00057
Plaintiff:
April Mae Howell
Defendant:
State of Mississippi, Delbert Hosemann, Secretary of State Michael Watson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Chism v. Manhattan Life Insurance and Annuity Company
as 1:2024cv00004
Plaintiff:
Bobby W. Chism
Defendant:
Manhattan Life Insurance and Annuity Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Pinkston v. Reeves et al
as 3:2023cv03143
Plaintiff:
Chaz Pinkston
Defendant:
Governor Tate Reeves, Commissioner Burl Cain, Kelly Christopher and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Chism-Brown v. QuikTrip Corporation
as 3:2023cv02628
Plaintiff:
Arma Gene Chism-Brown
Defendant:
QuikTrip Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Smith v. Chism
as 5:2023cv00201
Plaintiff:
Curtis Smith
Defendant:
Mrs. Peggy Chism
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Harris
as 23-60348
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Doran Maurice Smith
Defendant / Appellee:
Randy Harris, Sheriff Randall Tucker, Madison County, Mississippi and others
Smith v. State of Mississippi et al
as 3:2022cv00409
Plaintiff:
Doran Maurice Smith
Defendant:
State of Mississippi, Unknown Prosecutor, Sheriff Randall Tucker and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Owens v. Flanagan et al
as 3:2021cv00062
Defendant:
Sergeant Chism, City of Jackson, Officer Flanagan and others
Plaintiff:
Danny M. Owens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Brown v. Chism et al
as 4:2020cv04361
Defendant:
Anthony Marquis Farmer and Daniel K Chism
Plaintiff:
Mark Audwin Brown
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.
