Cases 21 - 30 of 31
Windsor v. Hatten et al
as 1:2011cv01923
Plaintiff:
William M. Windsor
Defendant:
B. Grutby, William S. Duffey, Orinda D. Evans and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1443
Windsor v. Duffey et al
as 1:2011cv01922
Plaintiff:
William M. Windsor
Defendant:
William S. Duffey , Maid of the Mist Corporation, Maid of the Mist Steamboat Company, Ltd. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1443
William Windsor v. Orinda Evans, et al
as 11-5087
Plaintiff - Appellant:
William M. Windsor
Defendant - Appellee:
Orinda Evans, Judge, William S. Duffey, Judge, Julie E. Carnes, Judge and others
Smith v. Evans et al
as 1:2010cv02017
Plaintiff:
Yvett Smith
Defendant:
Orinda Evans, Clarence Cooper, Julie E. Carnes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dean v. Carnes
as 1:2010mi00149
Plaintiff:
Thomas G. Dean
Defendant:
Julie E. Carnes
Cause Of Action: 00 U.S.C. § 0000
William Windsor v. Orinda Evans, et al
as 10-5177
Plaintiff - Appellant:
William M. Windsor
Defendant - Appellee:
Orinda Evans, Judge, William S. Duffey, Judge, Julie E. Carnes, Judge and others
William Windsor v. Orinda Evans, et al
as 10-5071
Plaintiff - Appellant:
William M. Windsor
Defendant - Appellee:
Orinda Evans, Judge, William S. Duffey, Judge, Julie E. Carnes, Judge and others
WINDSOR v. EVANS et al
as 1:2010cv00197
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM M. WINDSOR
Defendant:
ORINDA D. EVANS, WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR., JULIE E. CARNES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Dean v. The United States et al
as 1:2009mi00277
Plaintiff:
Thomas G. Dean
Defendant:
The United States, The State of Georgia, Douglas County, Georgia and others
Movant:
C T Corporation System
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1985 Consipracy to interfere with civil rights
Type:
Civil Rights
Dean v. Hatten et al
as 1:2008cv02153
Plaintiff:
G. Thomas Dean
Defendant:
James N. Hatten, Julie E. Carnes, Sharon Campbell and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal - Suit against Federal Officer
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.
