Cases 21 - 30 of 43
FERRELL v. SPARKMAN et al
as 1:2019cv02269
Defendant:
STATE OF TENNESSEE, TENNESSEE HIGHWAY PATROL ADMINISTRATION, JAMIE GIBSON and others
Plaintiff:
JAMES EVERETT FERRELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Tuscola Area Airport Authority, et al v. Daniel Elwell
as 19-1153
Petitioner:
Almer Charter Township, Michigan, Eric King, Dale Heinlein and others
Respondent:
Daniel K. Elwell
AHMED et al v. GLAZEROFF
as 1:2019cv01293
Defendant:
JOSH GLAZEROFF
Plaintiff:
ARZOO NASIM and NASIM AHMED
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
ALBRITTON v. RYAN
as 1:2019cv00857
Petitioner:
JOSH ALBRITTON
Respondent:
CHARLES RYAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
YUN v. CITY OF STROUDSBURG et al
as 1:2018cv01194
Plaintiff:
GLORIA SUN JUNG YUN
Defendant:
CITY OF STROUDSBURG, CHIEF DIRECTOR, CYNTHIA TALAMO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 17-7109
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
JAMES MADISON PROJECT et al v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
as 1:2017cv01392
Plaintiff:
JAMES MADISON PROJECT and JOSH GERSTEIN
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
JAMES MADISON PROJECT et al v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
as 1:2017cv00388
Plaintiff:
JAMES MADISON PROJECT , KEN VOGEL and JOSH GERSTEIN
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
JAMES MADISON PROJECT et al v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
as 1:2017cv00186
Plaintiff:
JAMES MADISON PROJECT , KEN VOGEL and JOSH GERSTEIN
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
JAMES MADISON PROJECT et al v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al
as 1:2017cv00144
Plaintiff:
JAMES MADISON PROJECT and JOSH GERSTEIN
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE , CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY , OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
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.
