Cases 21 - 30 of 92
James Warren Simpson v. Andrew Saul
as 8:2019cv02270
Defendant:
Andrew Saul
Plaintiff:
James Warren Simpson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Damon Williams v. PRK Funding Services, Inc., et al
as 19-35746
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF SEATTLE, RICHARD BESELIN, RONALD CAMPBELL and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAMON CHARLES WILLIAMS
NORRIS v JAMES WARREN and ASSOCIATES INC
as 7:2019cv00077
Defendant:
James Warren, III, James Warren and Associates, Inc. and JAMES WARREN AND ASSOCIATES INC
Plaintiff:
Darrel Norris
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Damon Williams v. PRK Funding Services, Inc., et al
as 19-35120
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF SEATTLE, RICHARD BESELIN, RONALD CAMPBELL and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAMON CHARLES WILLIAMS
DIAL v. TYNDALL FEDERAL CREDIT UNION et al
as 5:2018cv00282
Plaintiff:
DEBORA C DIAL
Defendant:
JAMES WARREN and TYNDALL FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Ryan & James LLC et al
as 2:2018cv00493
Defendant:
Catrinna Perry, Ryan Perry, James Warren and others
Plaintiff:
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.
TARVER et al v. BAYER CORPORATION et al
as 2:2018cv03948
Defendant:
BAYER S.A., BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC, BAYER U.S. LLC and others
Plaintiff:
JAMES WARREN TARVER, JR. and ASHLEY M. TARVER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Warren v. Rudolph et al
as 1:2018cv00721
Plaintiff:
James Warren
Defendant:
CO Rudolph , Lt Walia, Achterberg and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WARREN v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2018cv04981
Plaintiff:
JAMES WARREN
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC., IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Williams v PRK Funding Services Inc et al
as 2:2018cv00048
Plaintiff:
Damon Charles Williams
Defendant:
PRK Funding Services Inc, King County, Jeffrey Pyatt and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
