Cases 1 - 10 of 23
WALKER v. DIXON et al
as 4:2024cv00221
Plaintiff:
JESSE ALAN WALKER
Defendant:
RICKY DIXON, JAMES COKER, TIMOTHY NOLES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Coker v. Columbia Insurance Company
as 4:2024cv01768
Plaintiff:
Michael James Coker
Defendant:
Columbia Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
Coker v. United States of America
as 2:2023cv00143
Petitioner:
Cody James Coker
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
United States of America ex rel. Taryn Hartnett v. Douglas Smith
as 21-2035
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. TARYN HARTNETT; DANA SHOCHED, J. D. JENKINS, ELIZABETH COYLE and others
Defendant / Appellant:
DOUGLAS SMITH
Defendant:
PHYSICIANS CHOICE LABORATORY SERVICES, PHILIP MCHUGH, MANOJ KUMAR and others
Coker v. Colston
as 6:2021cv00268
Defendant:
J. Colston
Plaintiff:
James Coker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Coker v. Cano et al
as 1:2020cv04814
Defendant:
Felher Transportation Inc. and Gerardo Salas Cano
Plaintiff:
James Coker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
CAMACHO v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 4:2020cv00472
Defendant:
MARK INCH, JAMONT, MCKINNON and others
Plaintiff:
ISRAEL CAMACHO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
COKER v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv65837
Defendant:
3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
JAMES COKER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Coker v. Barr et al
as 1:2019cv02486
Plaintiff:
James Coker and James A. Coker
Defendant:
William Barr, Christopher Wray, Terrorist Screening Center and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 dj
WILLICH v. JONES et al
as 4:2018cv00591
Defendant:
TARLOS THOMAS, ROBERTS, FAIRLEY and others
Plaintiff:
ALLEN ROBERT WILLICH
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.
