Cases 1 - 10 of 100
USA v. Javontez Daniels
as 26-13174
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
JAVONTEZ LEE DANIELS
Daniels v. Neal et al
as 3:2026cv00621
Plaintiff:
Coy Lee Daniels, Jr and Coy Daniels
Defendant:
Ron Neal, Franklin Robbie, D Draper and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Eldridge v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 5:2026cv00752
Plaintiff:
Jarod Lee Daniel Eldridge
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Daniels v. Warden, Joseph Harp Correctional Center
as 26-6021
Petitioner:
DAVID LEE DANIELS, II
Respondent:
WARDEN, JOSEPH HARP CORRECTIONAL CENTER
Walde v. John/Jane Doe et al
as 2:2026cv00076
Plaintiff:
Paul Walde
Defendant:
John/Jane Doe and Deborah Lee Daniel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Daniels v. Warden
as 5:2025cv01085
Petitioner:
David Lee Daniels, II
Respondent:
Warden of Cimarron Correctional Facility
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Allen et al v. The 3M Company et al
as 2:2025cv11221
Defendant:
The 3M Company, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co, AGC Chemicals Americas Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Sakia K Allen, Gary Allspach, Alice Arnold and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Daniel v. Walde
as 2:2025cv00341
Plaintiff:
Deborah Lee Daniel
Defendant:
Paul Walde
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal-Child Support Enforcement
Daniel v. Walde
as 3:2025cv00439
Plaintiff:
Deborah Lee Daniel
Defendant:
Paul Walde
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal-Child Support Enforcement
James Edward Whitfield v. Lee Daniels et al
as 5:2025cv01035
Plaintiff:
James Edward Whitfield
Defendant:
Lee Daniels, Danny Strong, 20th Television, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
