Cases 31 - 40 of 52
James Lewis v. USA, et al
as 15-3195
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES D. LEWIS
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Warren v. Laird et al
as 1:2014cv08544
Defendant:
Paul D. Laird, Leanne LaRina, F. Timothy Coleman and others
Plaintiff:
Richard Eugene Warren
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bealer v. Godinez et al
as 1:2014cv07886
Plaintiff:
Antonio Bealer
Defendant:
Salvador A. Godinez, Jane/John Doe, Terry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HENLEY v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
as 1:2014cv01156
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Plaintiff:
JAMES HENLEY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
Reginald Potts v. Sprint-Nextel, Inc., et al
as 14-1625
Plaintiff - Appellant:
REGINALD M. POTTS
Defendant - Appellee:
SPRINT-NEXTEL, INC., GREGORY JACOBSON, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
PAUL v. SAWYER et al
as 2:2013cv00268
Defendant:
BAYLESS, J.F. CARAWAY, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Plaintiff:
JEFFERY PAUL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
PAUL V. STATE OF INDIANA et al.
as 2:2013cv00245
Defendant:
BUREAU OF PRISONS, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY W. PAUL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Ray Rogers v. Christopher Hendon, et al
as 13-1175
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RAY ROGERS
Defendant - Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER J. HENDON and AGENTS OF FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Shaw v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
as 1:2012cv01333
Plaintiff:
Norman Shaw, Jr
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rogers v. Hendon et al
as 1:2012cv06868
Plaintiff:
Ray Rogers
Defendant:
Christopher J. Hendon and Agents of Federal Bureau of Investigation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
