Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Gary Prater v. Jay Hutchings
as 26-5646
Plaintiff:
GARY PRATER, as Widower of Deceased Phyllis Prater
Defendant:
JAY HUTCHINGS, Officer, McMinnville Police Department
Thomas, Jr. v. Prine et al
as 1:2026cv03325
Plaintiff:
Larry Thomas, Jr.
Defendant:
Jr. James Prine, Margaret Chapura, Everlyn Jackson and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Ismael Padilla v. 203rd District Court
as 26-6622
Plaintiff:
ISMAEL PADILLA
Defendant:
203RD DISTRICT COURT, Dallas County Courthouse, TEXAS PRISON SYSTEM, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, Medical Branch and others
PLATT v. DAVIS et al
as 5:2026cv00199
Plaintiff:
PAULA FOSSETT PLATT
Defendant:
SHERIFF DAVID DAVIS, LIEUTENANT NICOLE GROOVER, DEPUTY CYNTHIA A FLOURNOY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
HUTCHINGS - HOWARD v. OLIVER et al
as 5:2026cv00184
Plaintiff:
CHASITY S HUTCHINGS - HOWARD
Defendant:
DAVID OLIVER and DALE GLOBAL LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Hutchings v. Chen et al
as 4:2026cv00443
Plaintiff:
Anita Hutchings
Defendant:
Shuo Chen, Hank Neuer, LLC, Jeffrey Hill Sprigg and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Sanders v. Castaneda, et al.
as 26-2095
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY SANDERS
Defendant:
CASTANEDA, W. HUTCHING, REESE and others
Hutch Paving Incorporated et al v. RB Construction Company et al
as 5:2026cv10928
Plaintiff:
Hutch Paving Incorporated and United States of America
Defendant:
RB Construction Company and Cherokee Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
Villa v. Hutchings, et al.
as 26-1367
Petitioner:
LESLIE VILLA
Respondent:
WILLIAM HUTCHINGS, Warden, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEVADA and JOHN HENLEY
Richard Hudson v. Jason Woosley, et al
as 26-5184
Defendant:
JASON WOOSLEY, Jailer, GARY SKAGGS, Medical Director, BOBBY ODOM, Captain and others
Plaintiff:
RICHARD DOYLE HUDSON
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.
