Cases 1 - 10 of 20
Shelton v. Kroger Limited Partnership I et al
as 3:2023cv03071
Plaintiff:
Roosevelt Shelton
Defendant:
Kroger Limited Partnership I, James Smith and John Does 1-15
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal-Personal Injury
Duff v. Smith et al
as 3:2021cv00595
Defendant:
Baggett Transportation, James Smith, Jr., Baggett Transportation Company and others
Plaintiff:
Andrew Lee Duff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith v. Middlebrooks et al
as 5:2021cv00069
Plaintiff:
Tyler James Smith
Defendant:
Warden Scott Middlebrooks, Investigator Unknown Higgabottom, Sergeant Unknown Ellory and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Ladner et al
as 3:2019cv00028
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Plaintiff:
Estus James Smith
Defendant:
Warden Brian Ladner and Sgt. Tirah Mixon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv00382
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. MDOC/MDOC Employers et al
as 1:2016cv00209
Plaintiff:
Estus James Smith
Defendant:
MDOC/MDOC Employers, Unknown Banks, Marshall Turner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Claybon v. T & M Jackson Development, LLC et al
as 3:2016cv00425
Plaintiff:
Angela Claybon
Defendant:
T & M Jackson Development, LLC , Topvalco, Inc. , The Kroger Co. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith v. Mississippi Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv00337
Plaintiff:
Tyler James Smith
Defendant:
Mississippi Department of Corrections, Michael Turner, Gary Holton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Turner
as 2:2015cv00012
Plaintiff:
Estus James Smith
Defendant:
Marshall Turner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Smith v. Sollie
as 3:2014cv00322
Petitioner:
Arthur James Smith
Respondent:
Billy Sollie
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
