Cases 51 - 60 of 60
Brown v. Louis et al
as 5:2009cv00351
Plaintiff:
Eric Brown
Defendant:
Audry Louis, Leroy Kutzer, Matthew Stolhandsky and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jerrod Booth v. City of Glendale, et al
as 09-15795
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JERROD LEN B.B. BOOTH
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF GLENDALE, RANDY G. ADAMS, Chief of Police, City of Glendale, JOHN DOE, Supervisor at City of Glendale Police Dept. and others
Darron Campbell v. City of Tucson, et al
as 09-15736
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARRON KEITH CAMPBELL
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF TUCSON, CHIEF OF POLICE, Tucson Police Department, TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT and others
Brown v. State of Georgia
as 1:2009cv00049
Petitioner:
Frank Eric Brown
Respondent:
State of Georgia
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Edward Gardner, IV v. Michael Easley
as 09-6256
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARD J. GARDNER, IV
Defendant - Appellee:
MICHAEL F. EASLEY, BEVERLY PERDUE, JOHN AND JANE DOES, NC Senators 1-500 and others
Booth v. Glendale, City of et al
as 2:2009cv00014
Plaintiff:
Jerrod Len B. B. Booth
Defendant:
Glendale, City of, Randy G. Adams, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Brown v. O'Brien
as 1:2008cv11953
Petitioner:
Eric Brown
Respondent:
Steven J. O'Brien
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Campbell v. City of Tucson et al
as 4:2007cv00401
Plaintiff:
Darron Keith Campbell
Defendant:
City of Tucson, Chief of Police, Tucson Police Dept and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gardner v. Easley et al
as 5:2007ct03104
Plaintiff:
Edward J. Gardner, IV
Defendant:
Michael F Easley, Beverly Perdue, John/Jane Does and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brown v. Travis et al
as 2:2007cv01857
Plaintiff:
Eric Brown
Defendant:
Jeffrey Travis
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
