Cases 11 - 17 of 17
Caldwell v. NLN et al
as 2:2012cv03375
Plaintiff:
Emmett Caldwell
Defendant:
Allison NLN, Irvin Condon and Julie Armstrong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
Arthur Field v. Henry McMaster
as 10-1957
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ARTHUR M. FIELD, PhD., KATHRYN TAILLON and T. BART KELLEY
Plaintiff:
CAPITAL INVESTMENT FUNDING LLC, Jerry T. Saad, Receiver for Capital Investment Funding LLC
Defendant - Appellee:
HENRY D. MCMASTER, Individually and as Securities Commissioner of South Carolina, WILLIAM JOSEPH CONDON, JR., Individually and as Assistant Securities Commissioner, TOMMY WINDSOR, Individually and as Securities Investigator and others
Mildred Knight v. Episcopal Church of the US
as 10-1947
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MILDRED C. KNIGHT and BOBBY KNIGHT, III
Defendant - Appellee:
EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE UNITED STATES, KATHARINE JEFFERTS SCHORI, EPISCOPAL DIOCEASE OF LOWER SOUTH CAROLINA and others
Knight et al v. Episcopal Church of the United States et al
as 2:2010cv00516
Plaintiff:
Mildred C Knight and Bobby Knight, III
Defendant:
Episcopal Church of the United States, Katharine Jefferts Schori, Episcopal Diocease of Lower South Carolina and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Field et al v. McMaster et al
as 6:2009cv01949
Plaintiff:
Arthur M Field, Kathryn Taillon, T Bart Kelley and others
Defendant:
Henry D McMaster, William J Condon, Jr, Tommy Windsor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Nathaniel Riley, II v. Mark Bourdon
as 09-1144
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NATHANIEL C. RILEY, II
Defendant - Appellee:
MARK BOURDON, CHARLES M. CONDON, HENRY MCMASTER and others
Riley v. Bourdon et al
as 2:2008cv03899
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Chad Riley
Defendant:
Mark Bourdon, Charles M Condon, Henry McMasters and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
