Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Randle v. San Francisco Sheriff Dept. et al
as 3:2026cv12491
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Randle
Defendant:
San Francisco Sheriff Dept., Captain Winters and Deputy Kim
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Randle et al v. State Farm Lloyds
as 4:2026cv09380
Plaintiff:
Curmett Randle and Brenda Randle
Defendant:
State Farm Lloyds
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Hovick v. Randle et al
as 2:2026cv00162
Plaintiff:
Dylan Joseph Hovick
Defendant:
Normadi C Randle, Todd Ball, Randle and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TY Management Corporation v. Randle, et al
as 1:2026cv00535
Plaintiff:
TY Management Corporation
Defendant:
Race Randle, Kainoa Casco, Maui Land & Pineapple Company, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
In re: Mark Stinson
as 26-13558
Petitioner:
In re: MARK T. STINSON
Respondent:
PAUL G. BYRON, KEVIN G. RITZ, WILLIAM BATEMAN, III and others
Brodiski et al v. Epson America, Inc.
as 8:2026cv02869
Plaintiff:
Jesika Brodiski, Tracy A Randle, Nelsene Deranian and others
Defendant:
Epson America, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Randle v. Federal Express Corporation
as 4:2026cv08261
Plaintiff:
Timothy Randle
Defendant:
Federal Express Corporation
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
Randle v. Evanston Township High School District No. 202
as 1:2026cv11159
Plaintiff:
Courtney C. Randle
Defendant:
Evanston Township High School District No. 202
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv10856
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
BENNETT v. TERRA et al
as 2:2026cv06607
Plaintiff:
COREY BENNETT
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT JOSEPH TERRA, A. OLIVERR, LIEUTENANT JOHN WRIGHT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
