Cases 21 - 30 of 60
Christopher v. City of Tupelo, Mississippi et al
as 1:2016cv00126
Plaintiff:
C. S. Christopher, Jr.
Defendant:
Richard Hill , City of Tupelo, Mississippi and Ed Neelly
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
West et al v. Hill et al
as 1:2016cv00156
Plaintiff:
Li'Trendia West and Charmaine Hartfield
Defendant:
Mario Hill and City of Gulfport
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Christopher v. City of Tupelo, Mississippi et al
as 3:2016cv00236
Plaintiff:
C. S. Christopher, Jr.
Defendant:
City of Tupelo, Mississippi , Ed Neely and Richard Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Little v. Mississippi Department of Public Safety Bureau of Narcotics et al
as 1:2016cv00048
Plaintiff:
Christopher Little
Defendant:
Mississippi Department of Public Safety Bureau of Narcotics , City of Fulton, Mississippi , Reginald Reggie Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv00033
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Hill v. Morel et al
as 3:2015cv00909
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey L. Hill
Defendant:
Melanie Morel and George T. Holmes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
West et al v. Hill et al
as 1:2015cv00399
Plaintiff:
Li'Trendia West and Charmaine Hartfield
Defendant:
Mario Hill and City of Gulfport
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00771
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00047
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Hill et al v. City of Laurel, et al
as 2:2015cv00015
Plaintiff:
Sharmen Hill , Kristen Lindsay Musgrove , Robert A. Musgrove and others
Defendant:
City of Laurel, Mississippi, Laurel Police Department, Tyrone Stewart and others
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.
