Cases 1 - 10 of 46
Charles Boomer, III v. Kenneth Melvin
as 23-6541
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHARLES ALGERNON BOOMER, III
Defendant / Appellee:
KENNETH RONALD MELVIN, Judge, BRANDON T. WROLDESKI, Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney, SARAH M. CROWE, Law Clerk and others
Sutton et al v. Gilead Sciences, Inc.
as 4:2023cv02607
Plaintiff:
Anita Edra Sutton, Brent Krichevsky, Brett M. Crowe and others
Defendant:
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Garcia v. Crow
as 23-40178
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Gregorio Garcia, III
Defendant / Appellee:
M. Crow, I. Wysocki and G. Flores
Crowe-Jackson v. Virginia Employment Commission
as 3:2023cv00001
Plaintiff:
Ciara M. Crowe-Jackson
Defendant:
Virginia Employment Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Boomer v. Melvin et al
as 3:2022cv00700
Plaintiff:
Charles A. Boomer, III
Defendant:
Kenneth R. Melvin, Brandon T. Wroldeski, Sarah M. Crowe and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Boomer v. Melvin et al
as 3:2022cv00182
Plaintiff:
Charles A. Boomer, III
Defendant:
Kenneth R. Melvin, Brandon T. Wroldeski, Sarah M. Crowe and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Nayman v. Berg et al
as 1:2022cv06258
Plaintiff:
Matis Nayman
Defendant:
Charles Berg, Douglas L. Braunstein, Jeffrey M Crowe and others
Garcia v. Crow et al
as 2:2022cv00068
Plaintiff:
Gregorio Garcia, III
Defendant:
M. Crow, I. Wysocki and G. Flores
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Crow et al
as 1:2021cv00116
Plaintiff:
Camilla Jones and Camilla Ivy
Defendant:
New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Co. and Colin M. Crow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Meldrum v. Arizona Board of Regents et al
as 2:2020cv02165
Defendant:
Skysong Innovations LLC, Unknown Cheng, Augustine Cheng and others
Plaintiff:
Deirdre Meldrum
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
