Cases 1 - 10 of 13
PENNINGTON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv49071
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL PENNINGTON
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PENNINGTON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv65005
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL PENNINGTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Teresa Miller v. Phillip Gaujot
as 20-6794
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, WILLIAM PENNINGTON, ROBERT W. TRUMBLE, United States District Court and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TERESA MILLER
PENNINGTON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv92139
Defendant:
3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
ADDISON MICHAEL PENNINGTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Michael Proctor v. USDHS
as 18-70657
Petitioner:
MICHAEL PENNINGTON PROCTOR
Respondent:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Miller v. Gaujot et al
as 2:2017cv03951
Plaintiff:
Teresa Miller
Defendant:
Phillip Gajout, Steven Fitz, Edward Rollo and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Michael Pennington v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden
as 17-30702
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL PENNINGTON
Respondent - Appellee:
DARREL VANNOY, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY
Miller v. Gaujot et al
as 1:2017cv00128
Plaintiff:
Teresa Miller
Defendant:
Phillip Gaujot, Steven Fitz, Edward Rollo and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Pennington v. Vannoy et al
as 2:2016cv12799
Plaintiff:
Michael Pennington
Defendant:
Darrel Vannoy
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PENNINGTON v. HUGHES et al
as 1:2013cv02692
Petitioner:
MICHAEL PENNINGTON
Respondent:
C. RAY HUGHES and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
