Cases 21 - 30 of 38
Charles v. Artus
as 1:2015cv03425
Respondent:
Dale Artus
Petitioner:
Stephen Charles
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MURPHY v. SMITH et al
as 1:2015cv00173
Plaintiff:
CAROL MURPHY
Defendant:
JONATHAN SMITH, EARL SAUNDERS, CHARLES HART and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nave v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals U S A Inc et al
as 6:2015cv00331
Plaintiff:
Stephen Charles Nave
Defendant:
Takeda Pharmaceuticals U S A Inc , Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc , Takeda Pharmaceutical Co Ltd and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Douglass v. Herrera
as 4:2015cv00104
Petitioner:
Stephen Charles Douglass
Respondent:
Robert Herrera
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv09208
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Baughn et al v. Moulton et al
as 1:2013cv00532
Plaintiff:
Stephen Charles Baughn and Leleaga Savaiinaea Baughn
Defendant:
Todd R. Moulton, Motooka & Yamamoto, Royal Kunia Community Association and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
In re: Charity Seymour v. Bank of America, et al
as 13-60080
Debtor:
In re: CHARITY M. SEYMOUR
Appellant:
CHARITY M. SEYMOUR
Appellee:
BANK OF AMERICA and STEPHEN CHARLES FERLMANN, Attorney, Chapter 7 Trustee
Boyd v. Clevland et al
as 4:2013cv00118
Plaintiff:
Stephen Charles Boyd
Defendant:
Justin Clevland, John Blalock and April Barber
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv03028
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Disability)
Putman et al v. American Medical Systems, Inc. et al
as 2:2012cv06799
Plaintiff:
Marcia Hope Putman and Stephen Charles Putman
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc., American Medical Systems Holdings, Inc., Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
