Cases 1 - 10 of 25
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv05653
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
KING v. DOOLY STATE PRISON
as 5:2023cv00456
Plaintiff:
ISSAC KING, JR
Defendant:
DOOLY STATE PRISON, JOHN OR JANE DOE, P A WOODARD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Naji v. City of Augusta et al
as 1:2023cv00132
Plaintiff:
Issac Ali Naji
Defendant:
City of Augusta, Richmond County Sheriff's Office, Officer Hood and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
KING v. DOOLY STATE PRISON et al
as 5:2023cv00341
Plaintiff:
ISSAC KING, JR
Defendant:
DOOLY STATE PRISON, JOE JAMES, DOOLY STATE PRISON MEDICAL UNIT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GHEE v. FLIX NORTH AMERICA INC et al
as 4:2023cv00070
Plaintiff:
SAMUEL GHEE and SAMUEL GHEE, IV
Defendant:
FLIX NORTH AMERICA INC, GREYHOUND LINES INC, GORGE MORE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Roberson v. Knighton et al
as 1:2022cv04158
Plaintiff:
Issac Walter Roberson
Defendant:
Ronnie Knighton, Officer Tyson Jackson, Sgt. Rubio and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
United States of America et al v. Lockheed Martin
as 1:2022cv00893
In Re:
Tesfalem Issac
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Lockheed Martin
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
Issac v. Unnamed Defendant(s)
as 1:2021cv00866
Defendant:
Unnamed Defendant(s)
Plaintiff:
Hashi Issac
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Issac v. Jackson
as 1:2020cv04945
Defendant:
LaWanda Jackson
Plaintiff:
Alfredo Issac
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
POOLE v. POWELL et al
as 7:2019cv00166
Plaintiff:
JAMES HUNTER POOLE
Defendant:
RON JAMES, Officer ROLLINS, PRESTON ADAMS and others
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.
