Cases 11 - 20 of 99
Barken v. Sarenac et al
as 2:2022cv00783
Plaintiff:
Regina Barken
Defendant:
Michael Sarenac, Kent Gordon and James Jordan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
JORDAN et al v. LINDBERG
as 1:2022cv00483
Plaintiff:
JAMES JORDAN, CBS INSURANCE, INC., EMPLOYERS FIRST CHOICE INSURANCE SERVICES INC. and others
Defendant:
GREG E. LINDBERG
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02085
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Jordan v. Hughes et al
as 5:2022cv00048
Plaintiff:
James Jordan and Austin Jordan
Defendant:
K. Hughes, Officer Farmer and Fayette County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JORDAN et al v. PREFERRED FINANCIAL CORPORATION, LLC
as 1:2021cv00914
Plaintiff:
James Jordan, CBS Insurance, Inc., Employers First Choice Insurance Services, Inc. and others
Defendant:
Preferred Financial Corporation, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
James McClain v. Robert Neuschmid
as 21-56035
Petitioner / Appellant:
JAMES JORDAN MCCLAIN
Respondent / Appellee:
ROBERT NEUSCHMID, Warden
Jordan v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2021cv00993
Plaintiff:
Howard James Jordan
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
James Jordan, et al v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc
as 21-2304
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES JORDAN, SHARON JORDAN, BOBBY HUGHES, Personal Representative of the Estate of Miram Hughes and others
Defendant / Appellee:
TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA INC
Jordan v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2021cv03105
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
James Jordan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jordan v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2021cv03103
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
James Jordan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
