Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Love v. Childs et al
as 5:2014cv00022
Plaintiff:
Sam Roy Love, Jr
Defendant:
Dr Childs, Oklahoma County Jail and John Wetsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Love v. Oklahoma County Jail et al
as 5:2011cv00675
Plaintiff:
Sam Roy Love, Jr
Defendant:
Oklahoma County Jail and John Whetsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Melissa Berniard, et al v. Dow Chemical Co., et al
as 10-30497
Plaintiff - Appellee:
CHARLES LANDRY, SHEILA GUIDRY, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, CHRISTALYN BROWN and others
Defendant - Appellant:
DOW CHEMICAL CO and UNION CARBIDE CORP
Love v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2010cv00400
Petitioner:
James Roy Love
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Florida Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Berniard, et al v. Dow Chemical Company, et al
as 10-13
Plaintiff - Respondent:
CHARLES LANDRY, CHARLES PRESTON, EVA BAILEY and others
Defendant - Petitioner:
DOW CHEMICAL CO and UNION CARBIDE CORP
Roy Loving v. A C And S, Inc., et al.
as PAE/2:09-CV-81878
Defendant:
A C And S, Inc
Plaintiff:
Roy Loving
Landry et al v. Dow Chemical Company et al
as 2:2009cv04881
Plaintiff:
Charles Landry, Charles Landry, Charles Preston and others
Defendant:
Dow Chemical Company, Dow Chemical Company, Steve Mulligan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Love v. Raemisch et al
as 3:2009cv00238
Petitioner:
Willie Roy Love
Respondent:
Rick Raemisch and Alfonso Graham
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BRADLEY et al V. A.C.AND S.,INC.(A,ET AL
as 2:2007cv66351
Plaintiff:
SHIRLEY M. BRADLEY, ELOSKIA BRADLEY, BOBBIE JEAN BRYANT and others
Defendant:
A C AND S, INC., A.P. GREEN SERVICES, INC., AW CHESTERTON COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
