Cases 1 - 10 of 453
Smith, Sr. v. McGinley et al
as 3:2024cv00420
Petitioner:
Mark Edward Smith, Sr.
Respondent:
Thomas McGinley and Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SMITH v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2024cv01186
Defendant:
LLT MANAGEMENT LLC, JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. and others
Plaintiff:
EDWARD SMITH
Not Yet Classified:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Wesley Smith, III v. Commonwealth of Virginia
as 24-1181
Plaintiff:
WESLEY EDWARD SMITH, III
Defendant:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, TIM KAINE, ROBERT A. DYBING and others
Smith v. Smith et al
as 2:2024cv02021
Plaintiff:
Nickolaus Edward Smith
Defendant:
Sergeant Eddie Smith and Sheriff Hobe Runion
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wesley Smith, III v. Walter Stout
as 24-1125
Plaintiff:
WESLEY EDWARD SMITH, III
Defendant:
WALTER W. STOUT, ROBERT A. DYBING, BEVILL DEAN and others
Stephens v. Smith et al
as 1:2024cv00398
Plaintiff:
Shonterria Stephens
Defendant:
Joseph Edward Smith and Annett Holdings, Inc. doing business as TMC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal - Motor Vehicle
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1050
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Arthur Smith v. Clerk of Court, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, et al
as 23-13994
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ARTHUR EDWARD SMITH
Defendant / Appellee:
CLERK OF COURT, ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS and CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK, ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
O'DONNELL v. THE BOUND BROOK BOARD OF EDUCATION et al
as 3:2023cv22821
Plaintiff:
PIERCE O'DONNELL
Defendant:
THE BOUND BROOK BOARD OF EDUCATION, EDWARD SMITH, CHRISTINE LARSON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal- Civil Rights Act
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.
