Cases 21 - 30 of 35
DAVIS v. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2013cv00232
Petitioner:
MICHAEL JAMES DAVIS
Respondent:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
U.S. Bank N.A. v. Davis et al
as 1:2013cv01047
Plaintiff:
U.S. Bank N.A.
Defendant:
Michael Shane Davis, The City of Pekin, a Municipal Corporation and Alicia J. Davis
Cause Of Action: Mortgage Foreclosure
Michael Davis v. Angel Medina
as 12-1198
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL J. DAVIS
Respondent - Appellee:
ANGEL MEDINA, Warden
Davis v. Superintendent
as 3:2011cv00451
Petitioner:
Michael J Davis
Respondent:
Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Davis et al v. Bayer Pharma AG et al
as 3:2011cv13139
Plaintiff:
Maria Davis and Michael F. Davis
Defendant:
Bayer Pharma AG, Bayer Corporation, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Michael Davis v. Patricia French, et al
as 09-2435
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL A. DAVIS
Defendant - Appellee:
PATRICIA FRENCH and MARY G. WILLIS
DAVIS v. WRIGLEY
as 1:2009cv00501
Petitioner:
MICHAEL A. DAVIS
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT WRIGLEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DAVIS v. SHERIFF OF HENERY COUNTY BUTCH BAKER et al
as 1:2008cv01310
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL A. DAVIS and MICHAEL A. DAVIS
Defendant:
SHERIFF OF HENERY COUNTY BUTCH BAKER, JESSE TRENNENPOHO, PATRICK CAMPBELL and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
DAVIS v. WRIGLEY
as 1:2008cv00758
Petitioner:
MICHAEL A. DAVIS
Respondent:
JEFFERY WRIGLEY
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Midwestern Teamsters Health & Welfare Fund v. Abide Trucking, Inc. et al
as 3:2008cv00037
Plaintiff:
Midwestern Teamsters Health & Welfare Fund
Defendant:
Abide Trucking, Inc. and Michael C. Davis
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
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.
