Cases 1 - 10 of 21
(PC) Watts v. Yamaguina et al
as 2:2023cv01243
Plaintiff:
Vernell Watts
Defendant:
A. Yamaguina, T. Sadler, M. Palagara and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
USA v. Michael Carroll
as 20-35814
Defendant / Appellant:
MICHAEL J. CARROLL, tobor11313@yahoo.com
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Wilson et al v. County of Lane et al
as 3:2020cv00321
Defendant:
Eugene 4J School District, Monique J. Carroll, County of Lane and others
Plaintiff:
Roxanne Franklin Wilson and Jason Edward Wilson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
USA v. Michael Carroll
as 19-30053
Defendant / Appellant:
MICHAEL J. CARROLL, AKA tobor11313@yahoo.com
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Carroll v. Price
as 1:2017cv01312
Plaintiff:
Ronald J. Carroll
Defendant:
Brandon Price
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Amal Jones, et al v. Pfizer, Inc.
as 17-80179
Plaintiff - Respondent:
AMAL JONES, individually and as wife, ROBERT JONES, individually and as husband, LINDA ROGERS, individually and others
Defendant - Petitioner:
PFIZER, INC.
Amal Jones, et al v. Pfizer, Inc., et al
as 17-56291
Plaintiff - Appellee:
AMAL JONES, individually and as wife, LINDA ROGERS, individually, CYNTHIA DE SAEGER, individually and as wife and others
Defendant - Appellant:
PFIZER, INC.
Defendant:
MCKESSON CORPORATION and DOES, 1-50
Kuzmicki v. Neidert et al
as 3:2017cv00341
Defendant:
Kenneth J. Carroll, Theresa Muley, David Neidert and others
Plaintiff:
Stanley Kuzmicki
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Amal Jones et al v. Pfizer Inc. et al
as 2:2017cv01254
Plaintiff:
Ramona J. Beckett, Bette J. Carroll, Luis Carroll and others
Defendant:
Does, McKesson Corporation and Pfizer Inc.
United States of America v. Carroll
as 3:2016cv00257
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Michael J. Carroll
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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.
