Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Mayweather v. Moseley et al
as 2:2023cv00177
Plaintiff:
Allan Mayweather
Defendant:
Franklin Roosevelt Moseley, Jowin Express, Inc. and Cherokee Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal - Motor Vehicle
MUNSEY-WALLS v. HANCOCK COUNTY et al
as 5:2019cv00001
Defendant:
RICKY BROWN, HENRY JONES MUNSEY, IV, HANCOCK COUNTY and others
Plaintiff:
ANGELA MARIE MUNSEY-WALLS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ashley Abramson v. Equifax Inc.
as 1:2018cv01466
Plaintiff:
Ashley Abramson, Kimberly Dawn Alvarez , Edwin Jeffrey Amador and others
Defendant:
Equifax Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
IN RE: EQUIFAX, INC., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation
as 1:2017md02800
Defendant:
EQUIFAX, INC., Customer Date Security Breach Litigation, Equifax, Inc., Charles Stimac, Jr. and others
Plaintiff:
David H. Yoder, Aventa Credit Union, Garry Randall and others
Petitioner:
Gregory A. Simons, Peter J. LaBreck, Elizabeth M. Simons and others
Not Classified By Court:
John William Davis, David R. Watkins, Christopher Andrews and others
Claimant:
Mike Barry and Kimberly J. Kohler
Amicus Curiae:
State of Indiana as Amicus Curiae
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Mayweather v. Bryson
as 3:2016cv00143
Petitioner:
Stacey Mayweather
Respondent:
Homer Bryson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
BIRT v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2016cv00160
Plaintiff:
MURRELL ANTHONY BIRT
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF GEORGIA, WALTER BERRY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mayweather v. Bryson
as 5:2015cv00049
Petitioner:
Stacey Mayweather
Respondent:
Homer Bryson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
DANIEL v. HANCOCK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT et al
as 5:2013cv00390
Plaintiff:
DAVID A DANIEL
Defendant:
HANCOCK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT , RICHARD MAYWEATHER , TAMPA LEWIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
