Cases 11 - 19 of 19
Brooks et al v. Luv Homes et al
as 0:2012cv00696
Plaintiff:
James Brooks and Lucy Brooks
Defendant:
Luv Homes , CMH Homes Inc , Oakwood Homes and others
Cross_claimant:
Clayton Homes , Luv Homes , Jo Ann Espinoza and others
Cross_defendant:
World Custom Homes Enterprises Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Hawkins v. USA
as 5:2012cv00078
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
James Brooks Hawkins, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
James Brooks v. Howard Arthur, Sr.
as 11-1899
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES BROOKS and DONALD HAMLETTE
Plaintiff:
SAMUEL ST. JOHN
Defendant - Appellee:
HOWARD R. ARTHUR, SR., In his individual capacity and RANDAL MITCHELL
Maurice Dunbar v. James Mett
as 11-6716
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MAURICE DUNBAR
Plaintiff:
REGINALD C. MACK, LLOYD BENNETT, TERENCE HAYES and others
Defendant - Appellee:
JAMES METTS, in charge of Lexington County Detention Center and CITY COUNCIL, or Person Oursee of the Courts
Stokes v. Buettner et al
as 1:2010cv02345
Plaintiff:
David Stokes
Defendant:
Charles E. Buettner, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, James Brooks and others
Movant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Dunbar et al v. Mack et al
as 8:2010cv01775
Plaintiff:
Maurice Dunbar, Reginald C Mack, Lloyd Bennett and others
Defendant:
James Metts and City Council
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brooks v. Astrue
as 3:2009cv00422
Plaintiff:
James Brooks
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
James Brooks v. Howard Arthur, Sr.
as 09-1551
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES BROOKS, DONALD HAMLETTE and SAMUEL ST. JOHN
Defendant - Appellee:
HOWARD R. ARTHUR, SR., In his individual capacity and RANDAL MITCHELL
Brooks v. Arthur et al
as 6:2008cv00028
Plaintiff:
James Brooks
Defendant:
Howard R. Arthur, Sr. and Randal W. Mitchell
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
