Cases 21 - 30 of 39
Edward Carlton v. Jennifer Granholm, et al
as 12-1041
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARD NATHANIEL CARLTON
Defendant - Appellee:
JENNIFER GRANHOLM, former Governor, FREDERIDCK PYTALL, Canton Township Police Department, BOOTH, Sergeant, Wayne County Sheriff Department and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 11-1706
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 11-1675
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 11-1470
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv11079
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 11-1255
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cecil Hawkins, Jr. v. David Grunst, et al
as 10-2599
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CECIL R. HAWKINS, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID G. GRUNST, Attorney at law, HANNAH J. WATSON, District Clerk - Michigan Court of Appeals, THOMAS M. HARP, Administrator - Michigan Appellate Assigned Counsel System and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv00654
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 12111
John Ray v. Michigan Court of Appeals, et al
as 10-1075
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN HENRY RAY
Defendant - Appellee:
MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS, CHRISTOPHER M. MURRAY, Chief Judge, MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT and others
Ray v. Michigan Court of Appeals et al
as 2:2009cv14346
Plaintiff:
John Ray
Defendant:
Michigan Court of Appeals, Christopher M Murray, Michigan Supreme Court and others
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Type:
Other Statutes
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.
