Cases 41 - 50 of 117
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv01055
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (District or BAP)
Harris v. USA
as 6:2017cv06018
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Steven Harris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv00034
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Harris et al v. Desa Industries, Inc. et al
as 1:2016cv09828
Defendant:
Desa Industries, Inc. and Scott Cooper
Plaintiff:
Steven Harris and Crystal Carlson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Alexander v. Birnel et al
as 6:2016cv00333
Plaintiff:
William P. Alexander
Defendant:
Bruce Armstrong, Lisa M. Birnel, Gilbert Campuzano and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - 42:1983 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv02327
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
United States of America v. Veedell
as 4:2016mc00737
Petitioner:
United States of America
Respondent:
Steven Harris Veedell
Harris v. The Prince George's County Department of Corrections et al
as 8:2016cv00585
Plaintiff:
Anthony Steven Harris
Defendant:
The Prince George's County Department of Corrections, M L McDonough, Kathy Burns and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mahaffey v. Halcyon et al
as 9:2016cv00488
Plaintiff:
James Mahaffey
Defendant:
Halcyon and Steven Harris Kross
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1333
Ramiro Canales v. Ronald Fox, et al
as 15-50488
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RAMIRO CANALES
Defendant - Appellee:
ASSISTANT WARDEN RONALD C. FOX, Individual and Official Capacity, ASSISTANT WARDEN BRIAN P. BLANCHARD, Individual and Official Capacity, LIEUTENANT JOHN E. RITTER, Individual and Official Capacity 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.
