Cases 11 - 20 of 37
HMY Realty Group LLC v. Davis
as 1:2020cv00143
Petitioner:
Carlos Love
Not Classified By Court:
Briar Cliff / The Brooks
Plaintiff:
HMY Realty Group LLC
Defendant:
Nathaniel Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Davis v. Jaques et al
as 1:2019cv03439
Respondent:
Dean Williams, Terry Jaques and Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The
Petitioner:
Nathaniel Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PETERSON et al v. DAVIS et al
as 2:2018cv03690
Plaintiff:
EDWARD H. PETERSON and PATRICIA M. PETERSON
Defendant:
JACOB NATHANIEL DAVIS and LEN THE PLUMBER, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Davis v. Fresno County Psych Teams et al
as 1:2016cv00541
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Nathaniel Davis
Defendant:
Fresno County Psych Teams and Margaret Mims
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. State of New York et al
as 1:2016cv02190
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Davis
Defendant:
City of New York and Chris O' Conner
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis et al v. Workbox, LLC
as 3:2015cv00336
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Davis, Janary Harris and Willie Roberts
Defendant:
Workbox, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Davis v. Dart et al
as 1:2014cv06577
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Davis
Defendant:
Thomas J. Dart and Tony Preckwinkle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Rikers Island Correctional Facility et al
as 7:2014cv05997
Plaintiff:
Dwayne Nathaniel Davis, Jr.
Defendant:
City of New York
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Davis et al
as 2:2014cv02519
Plaintiff:
JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Defendant:
Nathaniel Davis, Angela Davis and Current Occupants
Intervenor_defendant:
Curtis Lee Jones, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1444
Rahman v. Schriro et al
as 7:2013cv06095
Plaintiff:
Esteban Herrera, Sean Smith, Malik Rahman and others
Defendant:
Commissioner Dora Schriro, Warden Luis Rivera, Deputy Warden Russo and others
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.
