Cases 1 - 10 of 364
SAMS v. PRETORIOUS
as 2:2024cv00160
Petitioner:
RAYMOND D. SAMS
Respondent:
TRICIA PRETORIOUS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Behrens v. Forest River, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv00243
Plaintiff:
Raymond E Behrens
Defendant:
Forest River, Inc. and General Motors LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00102
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Kasmark v. Lakeshore Railcar & Tanker Services, LLC
as 2:2024cv00041
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND KASMARK
Defendant:
LAKESHORE RAILCAR & TANKER SERVICES, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
WHITE v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2024cv00184
Petitioner:
RAYMOND C. WHITE
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WHITE v. NKEMAKOLOM et al
as 1:2024cv00186
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND CURTHEL WHITE
Defendant:
NKEMAKOLOM, L. VAN, OMALEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WEATHERS v. FRANCIS et al
as 1:2024cv00116
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND L. WEATHERS, JR.
Defendant:
FRANCIS, JOHN DOE #1 and JOHN DOE #2
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HAWKINS v. SHAW et al
as 1:2024cv00057
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND HAWKINS
Defendant:
SHAW, SHANE NELSON and BRYON VANDERVORT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gibbs v. Pain
as 3:2024cv00023
Plaintiff:
Raymond Lee Gibbs and Raymond L Gibbs
Defendant:
Pain
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GIBBS v. PRETORIOUSE et al
as 1:2024cv00001
Defendant:
TRISHA PRETORIOUSE, TRISHIA PRETORIUS, KAYLA HALL and others
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND LEE GIBBS
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.
