Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Thompson v. Pugh et al
as 6:2023cv03110
Plaintiff:
Terrique Isaiah Thompson
Defendant:
Dalton Pugh, Johnson and Jason Schulte
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
King v. Ryder et al
as 2:2022cv04190
Plaintiff:
Christopher King
Defendant:
Phillip Ryder, Chad Hall, Jacob Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Marks v. Precythe, et al.
as 6:2022cv03220
Plaintiff:
Wesley Everette Marks
Defendant:
Anne L. Precythe, LaDonna M Buckner, Billy Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pugh v. Saul
as 2:2020cv00045
Plaintiff:
Merri J Pugh
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security and Andrew M. Saul
Interested Party:
SSA Office of General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416
Hittler et al v. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. et al
as 4:2018cv01474
Plaintiff:
Dana Root, Hector Calvario, Juana Guerrero and others
Defendant:
PTI Union, LLC, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., PTI Royston, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Pugh v. Perimeter Transportation Co LLC et al
as 4:2017cv00625
Plaintiff:
Cindy Pugh
Defendant:
Perimeter Transportation Co LLC and Jackie Lee Neal
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Pugh v. Junqing et al
as 4:2016cv01881
Plaintiff:
Tiffany Pugh
Defendant:
Fang Junqing and Ying Lan Trucking Express
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Finley v. City of Bowling Green et al
as 2:2014cv00109
Plaintiff:
Barbara Finley
Defendant:
Jim Moore , City of Bowling Green , Mike Pugh and others
Thirdparty_plaintiff:
Fredrich J. Cruse
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Woodard v. Havnes et al
as 5:2014cv06106
Plaintiff:
Hunter Woodard
Defendant:
Marvin Havnes, Amanda Pugh, Monica Goble and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pugh v. ADM Milling Co. et al
as 4:2014cv00317
Plaintiff:
Tony Pugh
Defendant:
ADM Milling Co. and Jeremy Rupp
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
