Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Smith v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc et al
as 4:2022cv03769
Plaintiff:
James E Smith
Defendant:
CVS Pharmacy, Inc, Richmond Montrose CVS, L.P. and CVS Pharmacy, Inc doing business as Roundrock 79 CVS LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Castleberry v. Texas Health and Human Services Commission et al
as 6:2020cv00008
Defendant:
James E Smith, ., Courtney Phillips, Jeff Bearden and others
Plaintiff:
London Castleberry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Porter v. Texas Health and Human Services Commission et al
as 6:2020cv00007
Defendant:
Jeff Bearden, Texas Health and Human Services Commission, Courtney Phillips and others
Plaintiff:
Deric Damon Porter
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Coltart v. State of Texas, et al
as 6:2019cv00464
Defendant:
Thu Le, Olsson LNU, John Doe #5 and others
Plaintiff:
Alexander Scott Coltart
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
James v. Texas Health and Human Services Commission et al
as 9:2018cv00212
Defendant:
James E Smith, Texas Health and Human Services Commission, Courtney Phillips and others
Plaintiff:
Anthony Latroy James
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Serrano v. Smith
as 7:2016cv00013
Petitioner:
Cresencio Cano Serrano
Respondent:
James E Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
United States of America v. Smith
as 1:2015cv00175
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
James E. Smith
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729
Hill v. Smith
as 7:2013cv00133
Petitioner:
Dwight Ray Hill
Respondent:
James E Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Hill v. North Texas State Hospital
as 7:2013cv00072
Petitioner:
Dwight Ray Hill
Respondent:
James E Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Hill v. North Texas State Hospital
as 7:2013cv00073
Petitioner:
Dwight Ray Hill
Respondent:
James E Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
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.
