Cases 21 - 30 of 383
Clarke v. Romney et al
as 1:2022cv00042
Plaintiff:
William Carol Clarke
Defendant:
Mitt Romney, Tammy Baldwin, John Barrasso and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Daniel King v. City of Henderson
as 22-15451
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DANIEL S. KING
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF HENDERSON
Russell v. King
as 4:2022cv04020
Plaintiff:
Eric Demond Russell
Defendant:
Nurse King and Nurse S. King
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Yo v. Allison Land
as 22-6186
Plaintiff / Appellant:
YO
Defendant / Appellee:
ALLISON LAND, Commissioner, MARIO DENNIS, Dir. of Forensic Services and CRAIG S. KING, Clinical Psychologist
KING v. MERCK & CO., INC. et al
as 2:2022cv00576
Plaintiff:
CYNTHIA S. KING
Defendant:
MERCK & CO., INC. and MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Coleman v. King et al
as 2:2022cv00068
Plaintiff:
DeCarlos D. Coleman
Defendant:
S. King, S. Newton, Unnamed Individual and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians et al v. Jaeger
as 3:2022cv00022
Plaintiff:
Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, Spirit Lake Tribe, Wesley Davis and others
Defendant:
Alvin Jaeger
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Other Civil Rights
Martinez v. Esochaghi et al
as 2:2022cv00054
Plaintiff:
David Martinez
Defendant:
Iheanyichukwu Esochaghi, E. Tatum, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wade et al v. Truist Bank et al
as 8:2022cv00287
Plaintiff:
Rossi Wade and Daughter (Jane Doe)
Defendant:
Truist Bank, Suntrust Bank and BB&T Merger, Suntrust "Truist" Bank and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Insurance Contract
KING v. BRANHAM et al
as 1:2021cv03008
Plaintiff:
ROGER S. KING, JR.
Defendant:
MIKE BRANHAM, ANDREW VERBOCHT, JOHN COCHRAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
