Cases 1 - 9 of 9
United States of America v. Hamilton (Buckhanon)
as 19-3490
Defendant:
Maurice Simmons, AKA Moneybagz, Lessage Jean Baptiste, AKA Usher, AKA Jean Baptiste Lessage, Ali Hamilton and others
Not Yet Classified:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
David Buckhanon
Young v. Winn Correctional Center et al
as 1:2015cv01068
Plaintiff:
Alonzo Deshaun Young
Defendant:
C C A Winn Correctional Center, Bludworth, Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dennis Simmons v. Secretary, FL DOC
as 13-10419
Petitioner - Appellant:
DENNIS MAURICE SIMMONS
Respondent - Appellee:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA and SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Christopher Wills v. Charles Rosenberg
as 12-6690
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER ANDARYL WILLS
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES PHILIP ROSENBERG, DONNA MARIE STEPHENSON, JOHN ROBERT STONE and others
WILLS v. ROSENBERG et al
as 1:2011cv01317
Plaintiff:
Christopher A. Wills
Defendant:
Charles P. Rosenberg , Donna Marie Stephenson , John Robert Stone and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Simmons v. Attorney General, State of Florida et al
as 8:2011cv00326
Petitioner:
Dennis Maurice Simmons
Respondent:
Attorney General, State of Florida and Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WILLS v. ROSENBERG et al
as 1:2009cv02458
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER A. WILLS
Defendant:
CHARLES P. ROSENBERG, DONNA MARIE STEPHENSON, JOHN ROBERT STONE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
United States v. Simmons
as 08-3217
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
MAURICE SIMMONS
Simmons v. Cadence Design Systems Inc
as 3:2007cv01029
Plaintiff:
Maurice Simmons
Defendant:
Cadence Design Systems Inc, Cadence Design Systems Inc and Cadence Design Systems Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
