Cases 11 - 19 of 19
Hooker v. Astrue
as 5:2012cv00308
Plaintiff:
Daniel E Hooker
Defendant:
Michael J Astrue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205
United States v. Hall, et al
as 11-3008
Plaintiff - Appellant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellee:
GARY LESTER HALL, THOMAS ANTHONY "TONY" GRANTHAM, KEITH DION NOE and others
Gates v. Phillips et al
as 1:2011cv00018
Plaintiff:
Dean Gates
Defendant:
Sharon Phillips, Joseph Singleton, Wormer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Epco Holdings, Inc. et al v. Enserca, LLC et al
as 1:2010cv02841
Plaintiff:
Epco Holdings, Inc.
Defendant:
Enserca, LLC and Enserca Engineering, LLC
Thirdparty_plaintiff:
Enserca, LLC and Enserca Engineering, LLC
Thirdparty_defendant:
Manuel Gallegos and Sierra Consulting Group, Inc.
Movant:
David Hooker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv02425
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
Riches v. Hooker, et al
as 09-8065
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JONATHAN LEE RICHES, d/b/a as Bernard Madoff
Defendant / Appellee:
T. J. HOOKER, CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, PROJECT SAFE CHILDHOOD and others
Riches v. Hooker, et al
as 09-8065
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JONATHAN LEE RICHES, d/b/a as Bernard Madoff
Defendant - Appellee:
T. J. HOOKER, CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, PROJECT SAFE CHILDHOOD and others
Riches v. Convicted Child Molesters et al
as 2:2009cv00093
Defendant:
Sex Offender Management Assistance Program, Rape Abuse and Incest National Network, T J Hooker and others
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Lee Riches doing business as Bernard Madoff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stephenson v. Utah County et al
as 2:2008cv00433
Plaintiff:
Terry J. Stephenson and Terry J. Stephenson
Defendant:
Utah County, James O. Tracy, Jr., Utah County Sheriff's Office and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
