Cases 1 - 10 of 791
BRASWELL v. COLLINS-DENNIS et al
as 1:2024cv00680
Plaintiff:
ANDRE V. BRASWELL
Defendant:
ALICIA COLLINS-DENNIS, DEBORAH OATS LIGHTFOOT and TANNIKA LIGHTFOOT PATTON
David Atkins, Jr. v. Doctor Shamar
as 24-6352
Plaintiff:
DAVID ATKINS, JR.
Defendant:
DOCTOR SHAMAR, Facility Doctor, NURSE STITH, RN, MS. OSEGHALE, Food Service Supervisor and others
Defendant / Appellee:
WARDEN MILLER
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01555
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Hill v. The Quaker Oats Company
as 1:2024cv02609
Plaintiff:
Hartence Hill
Defendant:
The Quaker Oats Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Makupson v. Lee et al
as 1:2024cv00129
Plaintiff:
Jamie Anthony Makupson
Defendant:
Bill Lee, Glenn Jacobs, Chief Oates and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wood v. Clarke et al
as 1:2024cv00404
Plaintiff:
James R. Wood
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, Steve Herrick, J.D. Oates and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tepper v. The Quaker Oats Company
as 1:2024cv02055
Plaintiff:
Daniel Tepper
Defendant:
The Quaker Oats Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Fitzgerald v. The Quaker Oats Company
as 7:2024cv01235
Plaintiff:
LILIAN FITZGERALD
Defendant:
The Quaker Oats Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity Action
Daniel Jamison v. Chadwick Dotson
as 24-6132
Plaintiff:
DANIEL W. PHOENIX, a/k/a Daniel W. Jamison
Defendant:
CHADWICK DOTSON, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, MARK AMONETTE, M.D., Chief Medical Officer, NATARCHA GREGG, M.S.A., RD., State Wide Dietician and others
Michael Collins v. J. Oats
as 24-6126
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL LASHARN COLLINS
Defendant:
J. D. OATS, Assistant Warden, C. WASHINGTON, Inmate Program Manager and BERNARD MORRIS, Religious Advisor to the Faith Review Committee for Virginia DOC
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.
