Cases 31 - 40 of 62
Donat Porter v. Merrick Garland
as 21-1094
Defendant / Appellee:
JAMES ROMINGER, BENJAMIN G. GOFF, CITY OF CONCORD and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DONAT CALEB PORTER
Robert Samson v. State of North Carolina
as 21-1165
Defendant / Appellee:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Office of the Attorney General, DIRECTOR BOB SCHURMEIR, North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation, EARNIE LEE, Sampson County District Attorneys Office and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROBERT M. SAMSON
Case Opened in Error
as 5:2021cv00089
Defendant:
Terry S. Johnson, Bob Schurmeier, Mr. Joshua Stein and others
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Grabarczyk
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TEASLEY v. STEIN et al
as 1:2020cv01166
Defendant:
JOSHUA STEIN, TAMIKA HENDERSON and MATTHEW TULCHIN
Plaintiff:
KENYA TEASLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Newell v. Roy Cooper Governor's COVID-19 Task Force et al
as 5:2020ct03378
Defendant:
Warren County Municipality, Joshua Stein, Todd Ishee and others
Plaintiff:
Jonathan James Newell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. United States of America et al
as 5:2020ct03301
Defendant:
Terrence W. Boyle, Vince M. Rozier, Jr., Joshua Stein and others
Plaintiff:
David L. Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TEASLEY v. STEIN et al
as 1:2020cv00790
Defendant:
JOSHUA STEIN, ALESIA BALSHAKOVA and MATTHEW TULCHIN
Plaintiff:
KENYA TEASLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TEASLEY v. STEIN et al
as 1:2020cv00787
Defendant:
JOSHUA STEIN, TAMIKA HENDERSON and MATTHEW TULCHIN
Plaintiff:
KENYA TEASLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TEASLEY v. STEIN et al
as 1:2020cv00788
Defendant:
JOSHUA STEIN, GWENDA LAWS and MATTHEW TULCHIN
Plaintiff:
KENYA TEASLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TEASLEY v. STEIN
as 1:2020cv00791
Defendant:
KATHERINE GLENN, JOSHUA STEIN, CHARLES WENTZ, JR. and others
Plaintiff:
KENYA TEASLEY
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.
