Cases 21 - 30 of 195
HESTAND v. Office of the Inspector General et al
as 6:2022cv00006
Plaintiff:
JAMON HESTAND
Defendant:
Office of the Inspector General, Officer Curtis D. Bitz, Officer Candace Stevick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Clervrain v. Shafer et al
as 1:2022cv00001
Defendant:
Peter B. Rutledge, David Shafer, Yang Yuanqing and others
Plaintiff:
Manetirony Clervrain
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
MATTHEWS v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv45160
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS C MATTHEWS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Mahler v. Inman et al
as 4:2021cv00934
Plaintiff:
David Mahler
Defendant:
Nicholas C. Inman, Erika Singler, Allmand Law Firm, PLLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1452
Timothy Hankins, Sr. v. State of North Carolina, et al
as 21-5156
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Timothy Omar Hankins, Sr.
Defendant / Appellee:
State of North Carolina, NC Administrative Officers of the Courts, North Carolina Court of Appeals and others
Damon v. Scottsdale Police Department et al
as 2:2021cv00994
Defendant:
Scottsdale Police Department and Unknown McBroom
Plaintiff:
Nicholas C Damon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LATHAM v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv25020
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS C LATHAM
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HANKINS v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA et al
as 1:2021cv01066
Defendant:
WAKE COUNTY CHILD PROTECTION SERVICE, NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS, WEST COUNTY DISTRICT COURT and others
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY OMAR HANKINS, SR.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KUTYN v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv16256
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS C KUTYN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
