Cases 61 - 70 of 191
Mathis v. Mitcham et al
as 1:2022cv01052
Plaintiff:
Daniel Todd Mathis
Defendant:
Captain Richard Mitcham, Casie Sanford, Harley West and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McClain v. County of Sebastian et al
as 2:2022cv02096
Plaintiff:
Tyler McClain
Defendant:
County of Sebastian, Hobe Runion, Nick Tuttle and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Epperson v. Mathis et al
as 4:2022cv00357
Plaintiff:
Henry Epperson
Defendant:
R Mathis, C Allen and Eric Higgins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Russell v. Pilgreen et al
as 4:2022cv04024
Plaintiff:
Eric Demond Russell
Defendant:
Detective Kelly Pilgreen, Lieutenant Nicholas Elrod, Detective Jesse Mathis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mathis v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2022cv00141
Plaintiff:
Kennita Mathis
Defendant:
3M Company and Aearo Technologies LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Mathis v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
as 4:2022cv00057
Plaintiff:
Clerun Mathis
Defendant:
Union Pacific Railroad Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Askew v. Pulaski County Regional Detention Jail et al
as 4:2021cv01159
Plaintiff:
Brandon Michaels Askew
Defendant:
Pulaski County Regional Detention Jail, Little Rock Police Department, Brace and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Christenson v. A.L.M. Holding Company
as 0:2021cv01701
Plaintiff:
Lloyd Johan Christenson
Defendant:
A.L.M. Holding Company doing business as Mathy Construction
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith v. Mathis et al
as 1:2021cv01004
Defendant:
Sheriff Ricky Roberts, Gussie Mathis and Courtney Mathis
Plaintiff:
James E. Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mathis v. Social Security Administration
as 4:2020cv01490
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Plaintiff:
Hunter Mathis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
