Cases 1 - 10 of 24
Howard v. USA
as 4:2023cv01217
Petitioner:
Raymond Howard
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Payne v. Lumpkin
as 21-20422
Petitioner / Appellant:
Raymond Howard Payne
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
USA v. Raymond Howard
as 21-1920
Defendant / Appellant:
RAYMOND HOWARD, a/k/a Smiles, a/k/a Smizz
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Dayter v. Czerwinski et al
as 9:2020cv01151
Defendant:
Dilon Cody, Officer Zackary Knobloc, Officer Adam Smaldon and others
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Dayter
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HOWARD v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv86318
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
GRANT RAYMOND HOWARD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 639 -- EMPLOYERS PENSION TRUST et al v. SHEPARD EXPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
as 1:2019cv01288
Plaintiff:
ERIC D. WEISS, ANTHONY SMITH, TEAMSTERS LOCAL 639 -- EMPLOYERS HEALTH TRUST and others
Defendant:
SHEPARD EXPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 639-EMPLOYERS PENSION TRUST et al v. YRC ENTERPRISE SERVICES, INC.
as 1:2018cv02371
Plaintiff:
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 639-EMPLOYERS PENSION TRUST, ERIC D. WEISS, PHILIP GILES and others
Defendant:
YRC Enterprise Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 639 EMPLOYERS PENSION TRUST et al v. Expo Plus, Inc.
as 1:2017cv02022
Plaintiff:
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 639 EMPLOYERS PENSION TRUST , TEAMSTERS LOCAL 639 EMPLOYERS HEALTH TRUST , THOMAS E. RATLIFF and others
Defendant:
EXPO PLUS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1132
McVay v. Colvin(CONSENT)
as 2:2014cv00897
Plaintiff:
Raymond Howard Smith McVay
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
