Cases 1 - 10 of 38
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv00183
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv01810
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Public Accomodations)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv00067
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HubFul Venture Consulting et al v. NTS Communications, LLC et al
as 5:2023cv00066
Plaintiff:
HubFul Venture Consulting and Gregory Allen Fisher
Defendant:
NTS Communications, LLC doing business as Vexus Fiber, LLC, Jim Gleason and Vexus Fiber, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Claybon v. Dallas County District Attorney
as 3:2022cv02185
Plaintiff:
Gregory Allen Claybon
Defendant:
Dallas County District Attorney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Claybon v. Dallas County District Attorney
as 3:2022cv00912
Plaintiff:
Gregory Allen Claybon
Defendant:
Dallas County District Attorney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Claybon v. Dallas County Criminal Court #1 et al
as 3:2021cv01864
Plaintiff:
Gregory Allen Claybon
Defendant:
Dallas County Criminal Court #1 and Dallas District Attorneys Office
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Laird v. Rosvall et al
as 4:2021cv00010
Plaintiff:
Gregory Allen Laird
Defendant:
Howard Keith Rosvall and ATS Specialized, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2018cv00052
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robinson v. Director, TDCJ-CID et al
as 3:2016cv01706
Plaintiff:
Gregory Allen Robinson
Respondent:
Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
