Cases 21 - 30 of 52
LAWSON v. BORDLEY
as 1:2015cv01710
Plaintiff:
TYREE LAWSON
Defendant:
WILLIAM E. BORDLEY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
In re: Competitive Enterprise Inst., et al
as 15-1224
In Re - Petitioner:
In re: Competitive Enterprise Institute, National Center for Transgender Equality, The Rutherford Institute and others
:
LAWSON v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
as 1:2015cv00551
Plaintiff:
RONNIE JEROME LAWSON
Defendant:
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
State of Texas v. USA, et al
as 14-5151
Plaintiff - Appellant:
State of Texas
Defendant - Appellee:
United States of America and Eric H. Holder, Jr., in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States
Intervenor For Defendant - Appellee:
Wendy Davis, Senator, John Jenkins, Vicki Bargas and others
STEWART et al v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
as 1:2012cv01654
Defendant:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Plaintiff:
SHAVON STEWART , A. D. , GEROLEAN CURETON and others
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1400 Civil Rights of Handicapped Child
LECG CORPORATION et al v. ABDALA et al
as 1:2012cv01101
Plaintiff:
LECG CORPORATION , LECG LLC and LECG CORPORATION DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN COMMITTEE
Defendant:
NEAL B. LAWSON , DANIEL L. REGARD , EDWARD F. SHERRY and others
Counter_claimant:
DANIEL L. REGARD and NEAL B. LAWSON
Counter_defendant:
LECG CORPORATION, LECG CORPORATION DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN COMMITTEE , LECG LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
LAWSON v. USA
as 1:2012cv01042
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
EQUILLA LAWSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
SMITH et al v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
as 1:2012cv00455
Plaintiff:
JAMES SMITH , SHELETHIA SMITH , ALETHIA STATON and others
Defendant:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1400
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv00188
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1400
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.
