Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Kyle et al v. Syngenta Crop Protection LLC et al
as 3:2022pq00490
Special Master:
Randi Ellis
Plaintiff:
William Kyle and Cheryl Kyle
Defendant:
Syngenta Crop Protection LLC, Syngenta AG and Chevron USA, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Mendez v. Kijakazi
as 3:2021cv01523
Plaintiff:
Cheryl Kyles Mendez
Defendant:
Kilolo Kijakazi
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 id
Kyle v. Sam's East, Inc.
as 4:2020cv00933
Plaintiff:
Cheryl Kyle
Defendant:
Sam's East, Inc. and Sam's East, Inc. doing business as Raymore Sam's Club No. 8243
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Kyle v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 1:2018cv00821
Plaintiff:
Cheryl Kyle
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Darron Grigsby v. Ken Kuykendall, et al
as 09-41172
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARRON DEWAYNE GRIGSBY
Defendant - Appellee:
KEN KUYKENDALL, JOHN DOE, Doctor, CHERYL KYLE and others
Thunder Davis v. Cheryl Kyle, et al
as 09-40722
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THUNDER CLOUD DAVIS, also known as David J. Davis
Defendant - Appellee:
CHERYL KYLE, KEN E KUYKENDALL and UNKNOWN UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH EMPLOYEE
Grigsby v. Kuykendall et al
as 6:2009cv00012
Plaintiff:
Darron Dewayne Grigsby
Defendant:
Ken Kuykendall, John Doe, Cheryl Kyle and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Davis v. Kyle, et al
as 08-40530
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID J. DAVIS, also known as Thunder Cloud Davis
Defendant - Appellee:
CHERYL KYLE, KEN E KUYKENDALL, TITO ORIG and others
Davis v. Kyle et al
as 6:2008cv00079
Plaintiff:
Thunder Cloud Davis
Defendant:
Cheryl Kyle, Ken E. Kuykendall, Tito Orig and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Chapman v. Buchanan et al
as 5:2007cv00327
Plaintiff:
Anthony K. Chapman
Defendant:
Virgin hensel Buchanan, Suzzan Canno Fleming, A. Bussy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
