Cases 41 - 50 of 139
REDMON v. SHROPSHIRE et al
as 7:2019cv00125
Defendant:
CLYDE ALLEN, RALPH SHROPSHIRE, Capt JIMMY MILES and others
Plaintiff:
OTIS REDMON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hill v. Howard et al
as 1:2019cv02281
Defendant:
Paul L. Howard, John Doe(s), Fulton County and others
Plaintiff:
Otis Hill, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DAKER v. WARD
as 5:2019cv00126
Defendant:
WARDEN SECRETARY TENAKA BROWN, LISA FOUNTAIN, TIMOTHY SALES and others
Plaintiff:
WASEEM DAKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WILSON, et al v. SELLERS
as 5:2019cv00118
Plaintiff:
EUGENE WILSON, II, JOHNNIE DURDEN, HASKELL JOHNSON and others
Defendant:
WARDEN SELLERS and WARDEN ERIC SELLERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
THOMAS v. DEAL
as 1:2018cv00181
Petitioner:
OTIS THOMAS
Respondent:
GOVERNOR NATHAN DEAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Dukes v. Schindler Elevator Corporation et al
as 1:2018cv04061
Plaintiff:
Michelle Dukes
Defendant:
John Doe 1-3, Otis Elevator Company, Schindler Elevator Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Dombrowski v. Parks Hotels & Resorts Inc. et al
as 1:2018cv04046
Defendant:
Parks Hotels & Resorts Inc., Otis Elevator Company, United Technologies Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Valerie G. Dombrowski
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
McNair v. Columbia Sussex Corporation et al
as 1:2018cv03603
Plaintiff:
Nicole McNair
Defendant:
Otis Elevator Co., Columbia Sussex Management, LLC and Columbia Sussex Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
DAKER v. DOZIER et al
as 5:2018cv00245
Defendant:
CHIEF COUNSELOR STREETER, BRUCE CHATMAN, MEDICAL DIRECTOR SHARON LEWIS and others
Plaintiff:
WASEEM DAKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Reese et al v. Clayton County, Georgia et al
as 1:2018cv03237
Defendant:
The City of Lovejoy, Georgia and Clayton County, Georgia
Plaintiff:
Otis Hughey and Fredrick Reese
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
