Cases 41 - 50 of 97
In Re: Russell
as 13-8041
Respondent:
FRANK F. RUSSELL
Interested Party:
MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT and MA BOARD OF BAR OVERSEERS
Ericson v. Magnusson, et al
as 13-1821
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ERIC ERICSON
Defendant:
MARTIN MAGNUSSON, Individually and in his official capacity, CORIZON, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, INC. and others
Defendant - Appellee:
JOSEPH PONTE, official capacity only, PATRICIA BARNHART, official capacity only, SCOTT BURNHEIMER, official capacity only and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 13-1658
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
US v. Rose
as 13-1525
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant - Appellant:
RUSSELL C. ROSE, a/k/a Baby Russell, a/k/a Double R, a/k/a Baby Boy
Judd v. Secretary of State of Maine, et al
as 12-2009
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KEITH RUSSELL JUDD
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES E. SUMMERS, JR., Secretary of State for the State of Maine, BUREAU OF CORPORATIONS, ELECTIONS AND COMMISSIONERS and STATE OF MAINE
Judd v. Holder, et al
as 12-1784
Petitioner - Appellant:
KEITH RUSSELL JUDD
Respondent - Appellee:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and others
Cryer v. UMass Medical, et al
as 12-1397
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DEREK SINCERE BLACK WOLF CRYER
Defendant - Appellee:
UMASS CORRECTIONAL HEALTH PROGRAM, TERRE K. MARSHALL, Director of Health Services, DYANA NICKI and others
:
JOHN DIAZ
Nystedt, et al v. Nigro, et al
as 12-1245
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DOUGLAS O. NYSTEDT, individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Evan T. Nystedt
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM PETER CORBETT, JR.
Defendant:
EARL D. MUNROE, RUSSELL F. MUNROE, GEORGE P. LORDAN and others
Defendant - Appellee:
MUNROE & CHEW, MICHAEL M. MCARDLE, MUNROE & MCARDLE 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.
