Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Copeland et al v. Energizer Holdings, Inc. et al
as 4:2023cv02087
Plaintiff:
Don Copeland, Joseph Murray, Carol Smith and others
Defendant:
Energizer Holdings, Inc. and Wal-Mart, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
M.Y. et al v. Copeland et al
as 4:2021cv00530
Defendant:
Solid Real Estate Group LLC, St. Louis County Gov., Yalima Holdings LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Maggie Cotton, Bernard S. Hooks and M.Y.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 18-16097
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Objector - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Fisher v. Honderich et al
as 2:2015cv00039
Plaintiff:
Carlos Lamont Fisher, Jr
Defendant:
Gaye Honderich, Sandra Burkett, Lynn Switzer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Darren Hathcoat v. Don Copeland, et al
as 12-10154
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARREN WILLIAM HATHCOAT
Defendant - Appellee:
DON COPELAND, Gray County Sheriff, SHELLY MCCARN, Gray County Sheriff Office Administrator and LISA PARMEN, Gray County Sheriff Office Assistant Administrator
Hathcoat v. Copeland et al
as 2:2011cv00052
Plaintiff:
Darren William Hathcoat
Defendant:
Don Copeland, Shelly McCarn and Lisa Parmen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McCarn v. Gray County, Texas
as 2:2011cv00033
Plaintiff:
Shelly McCarn
Defendant:
Gray County, Texas and Don Copeland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451
Hathcoat v. Copeland et al
as 2:2010cv00058
Plaintiff:
Darren William Hathcoat
Defendant:
Don Copeland, Shelly McCarn and Lisa Parmen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gerik v. Copeland et al
as 2:2009cv00247
Plaintiff:
Paul Thomas Gerik
Defendant:
Don Copeland and NFN McCarnes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
King v. Copeland et al
as 2:2009cv00134
Plaintiff:
Christian King
Defendant:
Don Copeland and Shelly McCarn
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.
