Cases 41 - 50 of 742
LEGRAND v. USA
as 1:2023cv00189
Petitioner:
KENNETH ORLANDO LEGRAND
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Burdsal v. Davis et al
as 3:2023cv00074
Plaintiff:
Thomas Burdsal
Defendant:
Scott Davis, Tim Garrett, Kara LeGrand and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HICKMAN, JR. v. FCI FORT DIX
as 1:2023cv00142
Petitioner:
GENE LEGRAND HICKMAN, JR.
Respondent:
FCI FORT DIX
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
LEGRAND v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv03163
Plaintiff:
TORENCE LEGRAND
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2023cv00216
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Clemens v. Nevada Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2023cv00035
Plaintiff:
Dave Clemens
Defendant:
Nevada Department of Corrections, K. LeGrand and T. Garrett
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LEGRANDE v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv00925
Plaintiff:
DONALD E LEGRANDE
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Lionheart Funding, LLC v. Rockwell Defense Group, LLC et al
as 1:2023cv00054
Plaintiff:
Lionheart Funding, LLC
Defendant:
Rockwell Defense Group, LLC, Jarred Forrest Lawyer and Kenneth Legrand Bradford
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Portus Singapore Pte Ltd., et al. v. Netatmo LLC
as 1:2023cv00016
Plaintiff:
Portus Singapore Pte Ltd. and Portus Pty Ltd.
Defendant:
Legrand North America, LLC, Legrand SA doing business as Legrand and Netatmo LLC
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
Charles Wirth v. Robert LeGrand, et al
as 22-16908
Petitioner / Appellant:
CHARLES M. WIRTH
Respondent / Appellee:
ROBERT LEGRAND, Warden and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF NEVADA
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.
