Cases 1 - 10 of 45
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv00320
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Brack v. City of College Station, Texas et al
as 4:2026cv01321
Plaintiff:
Cody Brack
Defendant:
City of College Station, Texas, Grimes County, Texas, Brazos County, Texas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
GEER et al v. TODD, et al
as 1:2025cv00375
Plaintiff:
KRISY GEER and ROY NICKERSON, III
Defendant:
JUDGE WILLIAM K. TODD, JUDGE BRYAN PHELPS, TROOPER TYLER SERASINI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gould v. Pavlock et al
as 1:2025cv00429
Plaintiff:
Brandon Gould
Defendant:
Christopher Pavlock and ADA John Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Pavlock et al v. Perman, M.D. et al
as 1:2021cv02376
Plaintiff:
Travis Pavlock, Sophie Helldorfer and Linda Whaley-Johnson
Defendant:
Chancellor Jay A. Perman, M.D., Board of Regents of the University System of Maryland and Board of Regents
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Pavlock v. 3M Company, The et al
as 2:2021cv02538
Defendant:
3M Company, The, Du Pont De Nemours Inc, UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation Inc and others
Plaintiff:
James L Pavlock
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Randall Pavlock v. Eric Holcomb, et al
as 21-1599
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RANDALL PAVLOCK, RAYMOND CAHNMAN and KIMBERLEY PAVLOCK
Defendant / Appellee:
ERIC J. HOLCOMB, CAMERON CLARK, CURTIS HILL and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv00215
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Pavlock et al v. Holcomb et al
as 2:2019cv00466
Plaintiff:
Kimberley Pavlock, Randall Pavlock and Raymond Cahnman
Defendant:
Eric J Holcomb, Tom Laycock, Curtis T Hill and others
Intervenor Defendant:
Save the Dunes
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.
