Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Nelson v. Shelby County Div. of Corr.
as 2:2021cv02641
Petitioner:
Ronnie Nelson
Respondent:
Shelby County Div. of Corr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
US v. Ronnie Clark
as 21-4516
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
RONNIE NELSON CLARK
SMITH v. CITY OF SPRINGFIELD et al
as 5:2021cv00178
Defendant:
Solomon E. Smith, CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FLORIDA, BARRY ROBERTS and others
Plaintiff:
SOLOMON E SMITH, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NELSON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv34324
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
RONNIE NELSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
NELSON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv99713
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
RONNIE NELSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Nelson v. City of Chicago et al
as 1:2019cv02723
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Nelson
Defendant:
City of Chicago, Black, Jason Olesnavage and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nelson v. Shelby County Correction et al
as 2:2013cv02587
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Nelson
Defendant:
Shelby County Correction, Correct Care Solution, Mark H. Luttrell, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
NELSON v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
as 1:2012cv00715
Plaintiff:
RONNIE NELSON
Defendant:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC v. .56 acre of permanent easement located in Maricopa County, et al
as 2:2007cv02362
Plaintiff:
Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC, Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC, Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC and others
Defendant:
.56 acre of permanent easement located in Maricopa County, 1.2 acres of temporary construction easement located in Maricopa County, Brenda Carter and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
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.
