Cases 31 - 40 of 44
Johnson v. L. Todd Corporation et al
as 3:2013cv02141
Plaintiff:
Michael Johnson
Defendant:
L. Todd Corporation and Larry Todd
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2012cv00563
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Pope et al v. Haman Brothers Limited, Inc. et al
as 4:2011cv01079
Plaintiff:
Justin Pope and Michael Johnson
Defendant:
Haman Brothers Limited, Inc. and Bob Haman
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2011cv00144
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Gardner et al v. L&J Cox Brokering, Inc. et al
as 1:2010cv00294
Plaintiff:
Rachel Gardner , Isaac Gardner , Peter Gardner and others
Defendant:
L&J Cox Brokering, Inc. , L&J Cox Trucking, Inc. and Michael Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jackson et al v. Pierce
as 4:2010cv02917
Plaintiff:
Johnny Jackson and Michael Johnson
Defendant:
Bill Pierce
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. CENTRE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. et al
as 4:2010cv02180
Plaintiff:
Michael Johnson
Defendant:
CENTRE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and CHRIS W. PACE
Counter_claimant:
CHRIS W. PACE and CENTRE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Counter_defendant:
Michael Johnson
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2
Ramdoss v. Johnson et al
as 1:2010cv00244
Defendant:
Abbott Garden Oaks, LP, Steven Michael Johnson and Realty Pros of Austin, L.L.C.
Plaintiff:
Sathiyaprakash Ramdoss
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Fair Housing Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2010cv00120
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Lundahl v. United States of America et al
as 3:2008cv01990
Petitioner:
Holli Telford Lundahl
Defendant:
United States of America, FMC-Carswell, R. E. Gregg and others
Amicu:
Law Offices of Morris Polich and Purdy
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
