Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Rogers et al v. GSB Transport, Inc. et al
as 6:2021cv00894
Plaintiff:
James Rogers and Andrew Ditmore
Defendant:
GSB Transport, Inc. and Gurpreet Singh Bhogal
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Rogers v. Dart Transit Company et al
as 4:2021cv00076
Defendant:
Corporate Medical Services, Inc., Dart Transit Company and Omega Laboratories, Inc.
Plaintiff:
James Rogers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GDC Technics, Ltd. v. Grace et al
as 5:2015cv00488
Plaintiff:
GDC Technics, Ltd.
Defendant:
James Roger Grace and J.R.G. Design, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plains Capital Bank v Rogers
as 7:2015cv00249
Plaintiff:
Plains Capital Bank
Defendant:
Michael James Rogers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Skinner v. Taylor et al
as 3:2014cv02421
Plaintiff:
Dennis Skinner, Thomas Anthamatten, James Rogers and others
Defendant:
NFN Taylor, Dallas County Sheriff Dept, NFN Rogers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brickman v. U.S. Department of Agriculture et al
as 3:2014cv00167
Plaintiff:
James Roger Brickman
Defendant:
U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Inspector General
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
GeoVera Specialty Insurance Company v. Amick et al
as 3:2013cv00262
Plaintiff:
GeoVera Specialty Insurance Company
Defendant:
Mary Amick, Bruce Amick, Louise May and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Rogers v. Astrue
as 1:2009cv00207
Plaintiff:
James Rogers
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Rogers v. Quarterman
as 3:2008cv01159
Petitioner:
Jason James Rogers
Respondent:
Nathaniel Quarterman
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Banks v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 4:2007cv04145
Plaintiff:
James Roger Banks
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
