Cases 31 - 40 of 67
Dixon v. Coleman et al
as 3:2017cv01476
Plaintiff:
William Robert Dixon
Defendant:
Coleman, Delacruz, Godsey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith et al v. City of Baton Rouge et al
as 3:2017cv00436
Defendant:
AIX Group, Jonathan Abadie, Jason Acree and others
Plaintiff:
Sean Benjamin, Lubin Gilbert, Sophie Kosofsky and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Dixon v. Director Nevada State Prison et al
as 2:2017cv01636
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Nevada and Director Nevada State Prison
Petitioner:
Robert Dixon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DIXON v. KAUFFMAN et al
as 1:2017cv00075
Petitioner:
ROBERT DIXON
Respondent:
KEVIN KAUFFMAN, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ERIE COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
DIXON v. KAUFMANN, et al
as 1:2017cv00072
Petitioner:
ROBERT DIXON
Respondent:
KEVIN KAUFFMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ERIE COUNTY, PA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Dixon et al v. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co Ltd et al
as 6:2017mc00024
Plaintiff:
Brenda Dixon , Charlie Joe Dixon, Jr , Robert Dixon and others
Defendant:
Takeda Pharmaceutical Co Ltd and Takeda Pharmaceuticals U S A Inc
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv03020
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Clay v. Butler et al
as 3:2016cv00612
Plaintiff:
Tiquion Clay
Defendant:
Kimberly Butler, Richard Ferrell, Robert Dixon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
The Reserve at Twin Oaks CF Lane v. Dixon
as 1:2015cv04470
Plaintiff:
The Reserve at Twin Oaks CF Lane
Defendant:
Robert Dixon
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
COX v. DIXON
as 2:2015cv05495
Plaintiff:
MARCUS COX
Defendant:
ROBERT DIXON
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.
