Cases 1 - 10 of 38
CAVERL v. RULE
as 2:2023cv00287
Plaintiff:
HOWARD JORDAN CAVERL
Respondent:
T. RULE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Howard Caverl, III v. United States
as 22-1810
Petitioner:
Howard Jordan Caverl, III
Respondent:
United States of America
Altinel et al v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
as 1:2018cv11896
Plaintiff:
Agnes Leonard, Mary Gleeson, Jing Fang Zhang and others
Defendant:
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1605 A
Jordan v. Janssen Research & Development LLC et al
as 2:2018cv13747
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Company, Bayer Healthcare LLC, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, INC. f/k/a Janssen Pharmaceutica INC. f/k/a Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
Howard Jordan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jordan v. Freeseman et al
as 4:2018cv00171
Plaintiff:
Howard Jordan, Jr.
Defendant:
Penny Haass Freeseman, John Wilcher, Georgia State Patrol and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bey v. Odell, Jr. et al
as 4:2018cv00092
Plaintiff:
Howard Jordan Bey
Defendant:
Harris Odell, Jr., John Wilcher and Zach Montano
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jordan et al v. AbbVie Inc. et al
as 1:2016cv01321
Plaintiff:
Howard Jordan , Mabel Jordan and AbbVie Inc., Abbott Laboratories, and AbbVie Products, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Bey v. City Of Oakland et al
as 3:2014cv01626
Plaintiff:
Ali Saleem Bey and John Muhammad Bey
Defendant:
City of Oakland, City of Oakland Police Department, Wayne Tucker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Morrow v. City of Oakland et al
as 3:2014cv01514
Plaintiff:
Frank Morrow, Jr.
Defendant:
City of Oakland, Richard Word, Wayne Tucker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 13-17658
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
