Cases 81 - 90 of 619
DOE et al v. AUSTIN et al
as 3:2021cv01211
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOE, I, JOHN 2 DOE, JOHN DOE #3 and others
Defendant:
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, III, Secretary U.S. DHS Xavier Becerra, Secretary Air Force Frank Kendall and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Komatsu v. The City of New York
as 21-2470
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Towaki Komatsu
Defendant / Appellee:
City of New York, NYPD Officer Rafael Beato, Shield No. 13326, NYPD Lieutenant Ralph Nieves and others
Collymore v. Commissioner of D.O.C.
as 21-2292
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Anthony T. Collymore
Defendant / Appellee:
Commissioner of The Department of Corrections, All defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities, Chena McPherson, APRN; all defendants are being sued in their individual capacity, Krystal Myers, RN; all defendants are being sued in their individual capacity and others
Defendant:
Warden, of MacDougall, All defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities, Robert Martin, All defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities, Lightner, Ms., H.S.A. of MacDougall, All defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities and others
James Miller v. Amir Kashani, et al
as 21-56015
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES L. MILLER
Defendant / Appellee:
AMIR KASHANI, Dr., L.A.C. AND U.S.C. MEDICAL CENTER GENERAL HOSPITAL, JOHN DOE, Oriental Dr./Physician; #1 and others
Bradley Monical v. Mike Winters, et al
as 21-35773
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRADLEY WILLIAM MONICAL
Defendant / Appellee:
MIKE WINTERS, Sheriff, COREY FALLS, Sheriff, JACKSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT and others
Defendant:
THOMAS LEE, Sgt., GARY CLARK, Deputy, CHRISTINA WALKER, Deputy and others
Christopher Judd v. Willis Langford
as 21-7305
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER ANTHONY JUDD
Defendant / Appellee:
WILLIS COLBY LANGFORD, Detention Facility Employee, Buncombe County Sheriff's Office, in his individual and official capacities and CHAUNCEY TAVARES THICKLIN, f/k/a Chauncey Thicklin, Detention Facility Employee, Buncombe County Sheriff's Office in his individual and official capacities
Defendant:
JANE DOE, Unknown Intake Nurse, JOHN DOE #1, Detention Facility Employee, Buncombe County Sheriff's Office, in his individual and official capacities, KEN VARNER, Deputy Sheriff, Buncombe County Sheriff's Office in his individual and official capacities and others
Steve Marquez v. C. Rodriguez, et al
as 21-55981
Plaintiff / Appellee:
STEVE MARQUEZ
Defendant / Appellant:
C. RODRIGUEZ, Correctional Officer at M.C.C. Federal Prison and L. KELLY, Correctional Officer at M.C.C. Federal Prison
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, BUREAU OF PRISONS, DAVID L. YOUNG, Warden of M.C.C. Federal Prison and others
Floyd v. City of New York
as 21-2091
Plaintiff:
Lalit Clarkson, Deon Dennis and David Ourlicht, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Plaintiff / Appellant:
David Floyd
Defendant / Appellee:
City of New York, Mayor Bill de Blasio, individually and in his official capacity and Commissioner Raymond Kelly, New York City Police, in his official capacity and individually
Defendant:
New York City Police Officer Rodriguez, New York City, in his official and individual capacity, New York City Police Officer Goodman, in his official and individual capacity, Police Officer Jane Doe, New York City, in her official and individual capacity and others
Intervenor:
Sergeants Benevolent Association, Patrolmen's Benevolent Association of the City of New York, Inc., Detectives' Endowment Association, Inc. and others
Reginald Wilson v. Brad Perritt
as 21-7222
Plaintiff / Appellant:
REGINALD L. WILSON
Defendant / Appellee:
BRAD PERRITT, KENNETH E. LASSITER, GEORGE W. BAYSDEN, JR. and others
Bungie Inc v. Elite Boss Tech Incorporated et al
as 2:2021cv01112
Defendant:
Officer, LPD John Doe 1, Officer, LPD John Doe 2, John Doe 3 and others
Plaintiff:
Bungie, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and Bungie Inc
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
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.
