Cases 1 - 10 of 1,756
Smith v. Troup County Sheriff Department
as 3:2024cv00164
Plaintiff:
Sandy E. Smith
Defendant:
Troup County Sheriff Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Exactech, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv05649
Defendant:
Exactech, Inc. and Exactech U.S., Inc.
Plaintiff:
Leonard E Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Smith v. Montgomery
as 3:2024cv03034
Defendant:
John Montgomery
Plaintiff:
Wiliam E Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shepherd v. Smith et al
as 6:2024cv06487
Defendant:
Rochester Police Department, Jacob M. Carter, David E. Smith and others
Plaintiff:
Elijah John Shepherd
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Smith v. Montgomery et al
as 3:2024cv03033
Defendant:
John Montgomery and Does 1-5, Deputies, Baxter Co. Sheriffs Dept.; Jail Administrator, BCDC
Plaintiff:
William E. Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Montgomery et al
as 4:2024cv00655
Defendant:
John Montgomery and Does 1-5, Deputies, Baxter Co. Sheriffs Dept.; Jail Administrator, BCDC
Plaintiff:
William E Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Montgomery
as 4:2024cv00643
Plaintiff:
Wiliam E Smith
Defendant:
John Montgomery
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith, Joseph v. Buesgen, Chris
as 3:2024cv00497
Respondent:
Chris Buesgen
Petitioner:
Joseph E. Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jacques Smith v. David Yost, et al
as 24-3608
Defendant:
MARK TEKULVE, Clermont County Prosecutor, MIKE DEWINE, Ohio Governor, DAVID YOST, Ohio Attorney General and others
Plaintiff:
JACQUES E. SMITH
Smith v. Monsanto Company
as 3:2024cv03832
Defendant:
Monsanto Company
Plaintiff:
Thomas E. Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
