Cases 1 - 10 of 16,187
Annamalai v. BOP et al
as 3:2024cv01207
Plaintiff:
Annamalai Annamalai and Swamiji Sri Selvam Siddhar
Defendant:
BOP, USA, S Holem and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Tort Claim
Randall v. State Farm Lloyds et al
as 1:2024cv00466
Plaintiff:
Jack Randall and Beverly Randall
Defendant:
State Farm Lloyds, Cannon Perdue and JP Segura
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
RICHARDS v. EMERSON
as 1:2024cv00745
Petitioner:
RANDALL RICHARDS
Respondent:
DONALD EMERSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Oke v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00244
Plaintiff:
Randall Oke
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Little v. United States of America - B.O.P et al
as 1:2024cv00059
Plaintiff:
Randall Little
Defendant:
United States of America - B.O.P, C Stern, Dr. FNU Winger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DeWolff Boberg v. Pethick
as 24-10375
Plaintiff:
DeWolff Boberg & Associates Incorporated
Defendant:
Justin Pethick and Randall Powers Company
Riley v. Linthicum et al
as 3:2024cv00117
Plaintiff:
Josh Randall Riley
Defendant:
Lanette Linthicum, Richard Lu, Alexander Perez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rodriguez v. Barber et al
as 5:2024cv00107
Plaintiff:
Ivan Rodriguez
Defendant:
John Barber and Randall Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Scottsdale Insurance Company v. Chiggers Bar, LLC et al
as 6:2024cv00150
Plaintiff:
Scottsdale Insurance Company
Defendant:
Chiggers Bar, LLC, Randall Dollar, Gandy Shane Farley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
Jermaine McAdory v. Alexis Limon, et al
as 24-1703
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE MCADORY
Defendant:
ALEXIS LIMON, RANDALL WILBORN and ALFONSO GREER
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.
