Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Cardenas v. United States of America et al
as 4:2023cv00745
Plaintiff:
Robert L Webster, bryan busch and Maria Cardenas
Defendant:
United States of America, Attorney General of the United States, Officer FNU Curiel and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Tort Claim
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv04421
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2019cv02673
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv00167
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Webster v. Washington State Superior Court
as 2:2009cv01489
Petitioner:
Robert L. Webster
Respondent:
Washington State Superior Court
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kirby v. Dallas County Adult Probation, et al
as 08-2292
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD G. KIRBY
Defendant - Appellee:
DALLAS COUNTY ADULT PROBATION DEPARTMENT, Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Dallas Co., MARK OLSEN, D. TODD HILL, Probation Officer, Dallas County Probation Department and others
Kirby v. Dallas County Adult Probation, et al
as 08-2265
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD G. KIRBY
Defendant - Appellee:
DALLAS COUNTY ADULT PROBATION DEPARTMENT, Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Dallas Co., MARK OLSEN, D. TODD HILL, Probation Officer, Dallas County Probation Department and others
Kirby v. Dallas County, et al
as 07-2125
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD G. KIRBY
Defendant - Appellee:
DALLAS COUNTY ADULT PROBATION DEPARTMENT, Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Dallas Co., MARK OLSEN, D. TODD HILL, Probation Officer, Dallas County Probation Department and others
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.
