Cases 1 - 10 of 73
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv01071
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Michael Watson v. Warden
as 23-13232
Petitioner / Appellant:
MICHAEL GORDON WATSON
Respondent / Appellee:
FCC COLEMAN - LOW WARDEN
Watson v. CIR
as 23-9001
Petitioner / Appellant:
MICHAEL J. WATSON and TRACEY L. WATSON
Respondent / Appellee:
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
Disability Rights MS v. Fitch
as 23-60463
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Disability Rights Mississippi, League of Women Voters of Mississippi, William Earl Whitley and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Lynn Fitch, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the State of Mississippi and Michael D. Watson, Jr., in his official capacity as Secretary of State of Mississippi
Ramone Wright v. Michael Watson
as 23-3559
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RAMONE L. WRIGHT
Defendant / Appellee:
MICHAEL H. WATSON
Watson v. Warden, FCC Coleman-Low
as 5:2023cv00428
Petitioner:
Michael Gordon Watson
Respondent:
Warden, FCC Coleman-Low
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Disability Rights Mississippi et al v. Fitch et al
as 3:2023cv00350
Plaintiff:
Disability Rights Mississippi, League of Women Voters of Mississippi, William Earl Whitley and others
Defendant:
Lynn Fitch, Michael D. Watson, Jr., Gerald A. Mumford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bradley v. Allen et al
as 4:2023cv00180
Plaintiff:
Dana Ruby Bradley
Defendant:
Wes Allen, Nancy Dahlstrom, Adrian Fontes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Other Civil Rights
WATSON v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv02005
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL A WATSON
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Wright v. Watson
as 2:2022cv04042
Plaintiff:
Ramone Wright
Defendant:
Michael H Watson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
