Cases 41 - 50 of 396
Renfro v. People of the State of Kentucky
as 3:2022cv00230
Petitioner:
Phillip W. Renfro
Respondent:
People of the State of Kentucky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Lovins v. USA
as 5:2022cv00101
Petitioner:
Phillip Lovins
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Cook v. Daviess Co. Detention Cnter et al
as 4:2022cv00048
Plaintiff:
Terry W. Cook, Jr.
Defendant:
Daviess Co. Detention Cnter, Scott Martin, Jenny Phillips and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Keith et al
as 6:2022cv00076
Plaintiff:
Andrew Johnson
Defendant:
Phillip Keith, State Automobile Mutual Insurance Companies and Auto Owners Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Auto Negligence
Renfro v. Robey
as 3:2022cv00190
Petitioner:
Phillip W. Renfro
Defendant:
Amy Robey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2022cv00026
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Patton v. Phillips et al
as 7:2022cv00023
Plaintiff:
James Patton
Defendant:
Lance Phillips
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00076
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
Hughes et al v. UPS Supply Chain Solutions, Inc. et al
as 3:2022cv00092
Plaintiff:
Marion E. Hughes, Raymond S. Batts, James A. Crume and others
Defendant:
UPS Supply Chain Solutions, Inc. and United Parcel Service, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 eb
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00011
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
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.
