Cases 31 - 40 of 466
ROBINSON v. USA
as 1:2023cv00446
Petitioner:
MICHAEL LAMONT ROBINSON
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2023cv01041
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Tapler v. Robinson et al
as 5:2023ct03146
Plaintiff:
Michael Tapler
Defendant:
Sharod Robinson and Joseph Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lockamy v. Robinson et al
as 5:2023ct03145
Plaintiff:
Antonio Lockamy
Defendant:
Sharod Robinson and Joseph Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00121
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Bungardner-Lockamy et al v. Robinson et al
as 5:2023ct03132
Plaintiff:
Zachary Bumgardner-Lockamy, Antonio Lockamy and Michael Tapler
Defendant:
Sharod Robinson and Joseph Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GAUSE v. GEOFF et al
as 1:2023cv00350
Plaintiff:
WALTER T. GAUSE
Defendant:
GREGORY GEOFF, FNU - SHAW, MORRISON LEACH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Robinson, III v. State of North Carolina
as 5:2023hc02077
Petitioner:
Jim Robinson, III
Respondent:
State of North Carolina
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Bungardner-Lockamy et al v. Robinson et al
as 3:2023cv00201
Plaintiff:
Zachary Bungardner-Lockamy, Antonio Lockamy, Michael Tapler and others
Defendant:
Sharod Robinson and Joseph Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Allen v. Durham P.D. et al
as 5:2023cv00107
Plaintiff:
Derrick Allen
Defendant:
Durham P.D., D. Robinson, Elaine O'Neal and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
