Cases 31 - 40 of 14,419
Cuminotto v. Dixon et al
as 8:2024cv01014
Plaintiff:
Leonard Cuminotto
Defendant:
Ricky Dixon and Sergeant Ryan Doll
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mangum v. Beltz et al
as 0:2024cv01505
Petitioner:
Leonard Mangum
Respondent:
Tracy Beltz and Keith Ellison
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Saxena v. Jackson, et al
as 24-1169
Plaintiff:
GRANT MITCHELL SAXENA
Defendant:
GARY M. JACKSON, MELISSA T. ANNIS, ZACHARY BANKS and others
Nelums et al v. Hutchens Law Firm, LLP et al
as 3:2024cv02427
Plaintiff:
John C. Nelums and Delmarshi Nelums
Defendant:
Hutchens Law Firm, LLP, PHH Mortgage Corporation, Cascade Funding Mortgage and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15 Antitrust Litigation
Baggett, Jr. v. Bural et al
as 2:2024cv02260
Not Yet Classified:
Jamita Swearengen
Plaintiff:
Leonard Ulysses Baggett, Jr.
Defendant:
Randall Scott Bural, Old School Express and JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Auto Negligence
Smith v. Lumpkin
as 24-10362
Petitioner:
Joseph Leonard Smith, Jr.
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
LOMBARDO v. LEONARD et al
as 2:2024cv01711
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL LAWRENCE LOMBARDO
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER BRYAN LEONARD and IMS TECHNOLOGIES SERVICES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander
McPherson v. Benedict et al
as 6:2024cv00020
Plaintiff:
Brentrez Jarmykus McPherson and Royal Great Levi King - Chief Levi Priest Yaheshiah
Defendant:
Pope Benedict, Department of Corrections, Georgia Dept. of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Does et al v. New York City et al
as 1:2024cv03042
Plaintiff:
John Does and Jane Does
Defendant:
New York City, Mayor Eric Adams, NYPD Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 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.
