Cases 31 - 38 of 38
Don Lang v. Reaga Sweat, et al
as 12-40664
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DON ALBERT LANG
Defendant - Appellee:
REAGA SWEAT, Peace Officer #383, City of Port Arthur Police Department, R. BRAY, Peace Officer #384, City of Port Arthur Police Department and PATRICK W. KNAUTH, Assistant District Attorney, Criminal District Attorney's Office Jefferson County
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv00287
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Pleasure Island Commission of The City of Port Arthur, texas v. BP America, Inc. et al
as 2:2012cv01424
Plaintiff:
Pleasure Island Commission of The City of Port Arthur, texas
Defendant:
BP America, Inc. , BP PLC , BP Products North America, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 33 U.S.C. § 2701
Pleasure Island Commission of The City of Port Arthur, Texas v. BP America, Inc. et al
as TXE/1:12-cv-00244
Plaintiff:
Pleasure Island Commission of The City of Port Arthur, Texas
Defendant:
BP America, Inc. , BP Products North America, Inc. , BP Exploration & Production, Inc. and others
Pleasure Island Commission of The City of Port Arthur, Texas v. BP America, Inc. et al
as 1:2012cv00244
Plaintiff:
Pleasure Island Commission of The City of Port Arthur, Texas
Defendant:
BP America, Inc. , BP Products North America, Inc. , BP Exploration & Production, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv00823
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
King et al v. City of Port Arthur, Texas
as 1:2010cv00304
Plaintiff:
Todd King and Leatris King
Defendant:
City of Port Arthur, Texas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Adrain v. Vigilant Video, Inc. et al
as 2:2010cv00173
Plaintiff:
John B. Adrain
Defendant:
Vigilant Video, Inc. and The City of Port Arthur, Texas
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
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.
