Cases 1 - 10 of 64
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv01158
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Mark Stinson, Sr. v. FCC Forrest City Warden, et al
as 24-10452
Plaintiff:
MARK T. STINSON, SR.
Defendant:
FCC FORREST CITY WARDEN, BLAIR, RANDLE and others
Stinson v. Mark Yates and Wall & Associates, Inc.
as 2:2024cv02077
Plaintiff:
Mark T. Stinson
Defendant:
Mark Yates, Wall & Associates, Inc., John P. Yates and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Theodore Griffin v. Martin County, et al
as 24-10256
Plaintiff:
THEODORE KEITH GRIFFIN
Defendant:
MARTIN COUNTY, WILLIAM D. SNYDER, BRANDON GREIS and others
Mark Stinson, Sr. v. John Fowlkes, et al
as 24-10254
Plaintiff:
MARK T. STINSON, SR.
Defendant:
JOHN T FOWLKES, DAMON KEITH GRIFFIN, NATHAN PATRICK BROOKS and others
Griffin v. Hinthorne
as 1:2024cv00270
Petitioner:
Keith Griffin
Respondent:
Cherryl Hinthorne
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Theodore Griffin v. Thomas McGuire, et al
as 23-14150
Plaintiff:
THEODORE KEITH GRIFFIN
Defendant:
THOMAS MCGUIRE and KERN DIEUDONNE
Not Yet Classified:
SERVICE
Stinson v. Fowlkes et al
as 1:2023cv24751
Plaintiff:
Mark T. Stinson
Defendant:
John T. Fowlkes, Damon Keith Griffin, Nathan Patrick Brooks and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Stinson v. Mark Yates and Wall & Associates, Inc.
as 1:2023cv24688
Plaintiff:
Mark T. Stinson
Defendant:
Mark Yates, Wall & Associates, Inc., John P. Yates and others
Consolidated Defendant:
John T. Fowlkes, Damon Keith Griffin, Nathan Patrick Brooks and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Mark Stinson, Sr. v. John Fowlkes, Jr., et al
as 23-5869
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARK T. STINSON, SR.
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN THOMAS FOWLKES, JR., DAMON KEITH GRIFFIN, SR., NATHAN PATRICK BROOKS and others
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.
