Cases 21 - 30 of 31
Smith v. Vasquez et al
as 1:2013cv00134
Petitioner:
Charles Kelvin Smith
Respondent:
C Vasquez and United States Parole Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv02465
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Smith v. US Parole Commission
as 3:2012cv00061
Defendant:
Bryan Bellelo and US Parole Commission
Interested Party:
Catherine Maraist
Plaintiff:
Charles Kelvin Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
US v. Kelvin Smith
as 10-7564
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
KELVIN SMITH, a/k/a Kevin
Caldwell et al v. Fedex Corporation et al
as 3:2003cv02878
Plaintiff:
Patricia Caldwell , John Conwell , Cynthia Guerrero and others
Defendant:
Fedex Corporation , Fedex Express , Feddex Ground Package System, Inc. and others
Miscellaneou:
Waukeen Q. McCoy
Pecial_master:
Edward Swanson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Kelvin Smith v. USA
as 3:2009cv80132
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Kelvin Smith
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
McCray v. Smith et al
as 3:2008cv01544
Plaintiff:
Johnny Floyd McCray
Defendant:
Kelvin Smith and Independent Trucking Services Inc
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Smith, et al v. Machorro
as 08-10350
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KELVIN SMITH and ANGELIA SMITH
Defendant - Appellee:
A R MACHORRO, Officer
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 08-15904
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Smith v. Famous Footwear et al
as 3:2007cv01547
Plaintiff:
Kelvin Smith and Angelia Smith
Defendant:
Famous Footwear, Brown Shoe Company, Valley View Center and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
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.
