Cases 1 - 10 of 15
STOKES v 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv24425
Plaintiff:
KENNETH STOKES
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
STOKES v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv71290
Plaintiff:
KENNETH STOKES
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Nurse Next Door Home Healthcare Services (USA), Inc. v. Four Gloves, Inc. et al
as 8:2018cv02101
Defendant:
Kenneth Stokes and Four Gloves, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Nurse Next Door Home Healthcare Services (USA), Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2017cv00425
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12131
Kenneth Stokes v. Commonwealth of Virginia
as 14-7546
Petitioner - Appellant:
KENNETH STOKES
Respondent - Appellee:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Bunton v. Stokes et al
as 3:2014cv00646
Plaintiff:
Tony Terrell Bunton
Defendant:
Kenneth Stokes, Robert Graham, Hinds Co. Board of Supervisors and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stokes v. Commonwealth of Virginia
as 1:2014cv00410
Petitioner:
Kenneth Stokes
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Virginia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Chandler v. Lewis et al
as 3:2013cv00540
Plaintiff:
Melvin Chandler
Defendant:
Tyrone Lewis, Robert Graham, Douglas Anderson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Betty Hearn v. Bd Supr Hinds County, MS, et al
as 13-60508
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BETTY SMITH HEARN
Defendant - Appellee:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, ZURICH INSURANCE NORTH AMERICA and others
Gaines v. Hinds County Board of Supervisors et al
as 3:2013cv00203
Plaintiff:
Willie B. Gaines
Defendant:
Hinds County Board of Supervisors, Robert Graham, Douglas Anderson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
