Cases 1 - 10 of 13
In re: Robert Hammer, et al
as 22-0504
Petitioner:
In re: ROBERT HAMMER, Assistant Special Agent in Charge, HSI, DAVID VICENTE PENA, FRANCISCO AYALA, Agent, ICE ERO and others
Respondent:
ISABELA ZELAYA, GERONIMO GUERRERO, CAROLINA ROMULO MENDOZA and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2020cv00438
Trustee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Debtor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Not Classified By Court:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Interested Party:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
BIRD v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv81166
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
JAMES CHRISTOPHER BIRD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Bird v. Dauffenbach et al
as 1:2019cv01384
Petitioner:
James Craig Bird
Respondent:
Scott Dauffenbach and Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
James Bird, II v. Tony Parker, et al
as 19-5459
Defendant / Appellee:
MATT ENGLE, SHAWN PHILLIPS, Warden, STEVE CANTRELL and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES D. BIRD, II
Bird v. Parker et al
as 3:2017cv00206
Plaintiff:
James D Bird, II
Defendant:
Tony Parker, Jason Woodall, Shawn Phillips and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
U.S. Specialty Insurance Company v. Bird et al
as 2:2017cv00311
Plaintiff:
U.S. Specialty Insurance Company
Defendant:
James A Bird and Beverly Bird
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Bird v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv01326
Plaintiff:
James D. Bird
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Bird v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv03594
Plaintiff:
James D. Bird
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. v. Bird
as 1:2011cv04352
Plaintiff:
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P.
Defendant:
James M. Bird
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
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.
