Cases 41 - 50 of 80
Waugh v. Oklahoma State of et al
as 5:2011cv01419
Plaintiff:
Michael J Waugh
Defendant:
Oklahoma State of, Major County of, Charles A Phillips and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Phillips v. Holder et al
as 3:2011cv01336
Petitioner:
Charles A Phillips
Respondent:
Eric Holder , Isaac Fulwood and B.A. Bledsoe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Richard D. Del Pino v. Larry S. Flax et al
as 2:2011cv05311
Defendant:
Leslie E Bider, CPK Holdings Inc, CPK Merger Sub Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Richard D Del Pino
Phillips v. American Specialty Health Networks Inc
as 5:2011cv00220
Plaintiff:
Charles B Phillips, Jr
Defendant:
American Specialty Health Networks Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
PHILLIPS et al v. ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC.
as 2:2011cv65663
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WALTER PHILLIPS and ALVARETTA PHILLIPS
Defendant:
ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Phillips v. Livingston et al
as 4:2011cv00050
Defendant:
Gabriel Armendariz, April Arredondo, Ayrro and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Ray Phillips
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Christopher Jones v. Tracey Wyatt
as 11-11825
Plaintiff - Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER M. JONES
Defendant - Appellant:
TRACEY WYATT, individually and in his official capacity as Councilman of College Park, Georgia and CHARLES E. PHILLIPS, SR.
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 11-11605
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
KingVision Pay Per View, Ltd. v. BTB Entertainment, Inc. et al
as 4:2011cv00240
Plaintiff:
KingVision Pay Per View, Ltd.
Defendant:
BTB Entertainment, Inc. and Charles S. Phillips
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0521
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2010cv00397
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
