Cases 1 - 10 of 29
Zarate v. Coger et al
as 5:2024cv00278
Plaintiff:
Isaac Zarate
Defendant:
Warden FNU Coger, Warden FNU Gould, Warden FNU Feazel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
USA v. Michael Baird
as 22-1877
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
MICHAEL J. BAIRD
American Select Insurance Company v. Harbison et al
as 2:2022cv00044
Plaintiff:
AMERICAN SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY
Defendant:
VINCENT HARBISON, PAMELA HARBISON, JAMES J. BAIRD and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
Izzo Golf, Inc. f/k/a Dancorp Investors, Inc. v. King Par Corporation et al
as 2:2020mc50830
Plaintiff:
Izzo Golf, Inc. f/k/a Dancorp Investors, Inc.
Defendant:
XYZ Corporation 1-10, B & P Baird Holdings, Inc., Mary Roe 10 and others
Izzo Golf, Inc. f/k/a Dancorp Investors, Inc. v. King Par Corporation et al
as 2:2020cv11920
Plaintiff:
Izzo Golf, Inc. f/k/a Dancorp Investors, Inc.
Defendant:
XYZ Corporation 1-10, B & P Baird Holdings, Inc., Mary Roe 10 and others
Jackson v. Elmer et al
as 6:2020cv00205
Defendant:
Sue Torrez, Unknown Purvis, Norris Jackson and others
Plaintiff:
Eunicholas E Jackson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Izzo Golf Inc. v. King Par Golf Incorporated
as 20-1016
Plaintiff / Appellant:
IZZO GOLF INC., fka Dancorp Investors, Inc.
Defendant / Appellee:
KING PAR GOLF INCORPORATED, dba Knight Golf Company and WILLIAM J. BAIRD
Izzo Golf Inc. v. King Par Golf Incorporated
as 19-2416
Plaintiff / Appellee:
IZZO GOLF INC., fka Dancorp Investors, Inc.
Defendant / Appellant:
KING PAR GOLF INCORPORATED, dba Knight Golf Company and WILLIAM J. BAIRD
Izzo Golf v. King Par Corporation
as 19-2935
Defendant:
XYZ Corporation 1-10, B & P Baird Holdings, Inc., KP Acquisition Company and others
Defendant / Appellant:
William J. Baird
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Izzo Golf, FKA Dancorp Investors, Inc.
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.
