Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01016
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01010
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
4Th Party Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01009
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01008
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DALLAL-RAWHI v. FELIX et al
as 1:2023cv01004
Plaintiff:
FARHA DALLAL-RAWHI and FARHA, DALLAL-RAWHI DBA DALLAL RAWHI FARHA
Defendant:
PAUL A. FELIX, ANJUM AVA, DONALD LEE BUCKINGHAM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WOODY v. COOK INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2019cv00795
Plaintiff:
DONALD L WOODY and DONALD LEE WOODY
Defendant:
COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL LLC and WILLIAM COOK EUROPE APS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Armour v. Lawerance et al
as 2:2017cv00050
Plaintiff:
Donald Lee Armour
Defendant:
Steve Lawerance, Eric Tchaptchet, Valerie Thorn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TATE v. LARIVA
as 2:2015cv00235
Respondent:
L. LARIVA
Petitioner:
DONALD LEE TATE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
ROBERSON v. COLVIN
as 4:2014cv00088
Defendant:
CAROLYN W. COLVIN
Plaintiff:
DONALD LEE ROBERSON
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
SELLECK v. MITCHELL et al
as 1:2009cv01284
Plaintiff:
DONALD LEE SELLECK
Defendant:
MARK A. MITCHELL, TEENA HATFIELD, JIM SMITH 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.
