Cases 1 - 10 of 9,912
United States of America v. Lane
as 24-1254
Defendant:
ANDREW LANE and Joey Green
Not Yet Classified:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Anthony Grimes v. Tim Lane
as 24-5456
Petitioner:
ANTHONY THOMAS GRIMES
Respondent:
TIM LANE, Warden
Jackson v. Scott County et al
as 4:2024cv00159
Plaintiff:
Mark Lee Jackson
Defendant:
Scott County, Tim Lane and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dykes v. Dutton et al
as 2:2024cv02058
Plaintiff:
Jeremy Lane Dykes, Sr.
Defendant:
Officer Dutton, Officer Flippin, Detective Dalton Wagner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Progressive Casualty Insurance Company et al v. Estate of Hunter Lane
as 6:2024cv01075
Plaintiff:
Darlene Paxson
Defendant:
Estate of Hunter Lane
Garnishee:
Progressive Casualty Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence
Progressive Direct Insurance Company et al v. Estate of Hunter Lane
as 6:2024cv01076
Plaintiff:
Darlene Paxson
Defendant:
Estate of Hunter Lane
Garnishee:
Progressive Direct Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence
Javon Gardner v. Stephen Lane, et al
as 24-1965
Plaintiff:
Javon Henry Gardner
Defendant:
Stephen Lane, Captain, East Arkansas Regional Unit, Norton, Sgt., East Arkansas Regional Unit, S. Davis, Sgt., East Arkansas Regional Unit and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv01090
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Hassell v. Kimbark, et al
as 24-1442
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW-LANE HASSELL
Defendant:
DEVIN AILEEN KIMBARK, CHERYL L. KIMBARK, MARK KIMBARK and others
67 Park Lane Holding Corp. v. Ramzan et al
as 2:2024cv03308
Plaintiff:
67 Park Lane Holding Corp.
Defendant:
Bibi Ramzan, John Doe and Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
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.
