Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Nachiappan Muthukumar v. Fitzgerald, et al
as 12-11134
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NACHIAPPAN SUBBIAH MUTHUKUMAR
Defendant - Appellee:
FITZGERALD, Judge in the Fifth District Court of Appeals and SANTA ROSA APARTMENTS
Nachiappan Muthukumar v. Fitzgerald, et al
as 12-11106
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NACHIAPPAN SUBBIAH MUTHUKUMAR
Defendant - Appellee:
FITZGERALD, Judge in the Fifth District Court of Appeals and SANTA ROSA APARTMENTS
Nachiappan Muthukumar v. David Bridges, et al
as 12-11009
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NACHIAPPAN SUBBIAH MUTHUKUMAR
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID LEE BRIDGES, Fifth District Court of Appeals, Texas and KING FIFER, County Court at Law No. 2, Dallas County
Nachiappan Muthukumar v. Nissan North America, Inc.
as 12-11006
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NACHIAPPAN SUBBIAH MUTHUKUMAR
Defendant - Appellee:
NISSAN NORTH AMERICA INC
Nachiappan Muthukumar v. Bankston Nissan Lewisville
as 12-10958
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NACHIAPPAN SUBBIAH MUTHUKUMAR
Defendant - Appellee:
BANKSTON NISSAN LEWISVILLE
Nachiappan Muthukumar v. Nissan North America Inc.
as 12-10956
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NACHIAPPAN SUBBIAH MUTHUKUMAR
Defendant - Appellee:
NISSAN NORTH AMERICA INC
Muthukumar v. Fitzgerald et al
as 3:2012cv03779
Plaintiff:
Nachiappan Subbiah Muthukumar
Defendant:
NFN Fitzgerald and Santa Rosa Apts
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Muthukumar v. Bridges et al
as 3:2012cv02629
Plaintiff:
Nachiappan Subbiah Muthukumar
Defendant:
David Bridges and King Fifer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Muthukumar v. Nissan North America Inc
as 3:2012cv02172
Plaintiff:
Nachiappan Subbiah Muthukumar
Defendant:
Nissan North America Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Muthukumar v. Bankston Nissan Lewisville
as 3:2012cv02007
Plaintiff:
Nachiappan Subbiah Muthukumar
Defendant:
Bankston Nissan Lewisville
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
