Cases 11 - 20 of 35
HOLDER v. BARR et al
as 1:2019cv03520
Defendant:
UTTAM DHILLON, KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER, JOHN DOE and others
Plaintiff:
Norris G. Holder, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
PURKEY v. BARR et al
as 1:2019cv03214
Defendant:
JOHN DOES I-X, KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER, T.J. WATSON and others
Plaintiff:
WESLEY IRA PURKEY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551
LEE v. BARR et al
as 1:2019cv02559
Defendant:
JOHN DOES I-X, UTTAM DHILLON, KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER and others
Plaintiff:
DANIEL LEWIS LEE
Not Classified By Court:
DUSTIN LEE HONKEN
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551
WEAVER v. RUSSELL et al
as 1:2018cv00961
Plaintiff:
JUSTIN D. WEAVER
Defendant:
MICHAEL D. RUSSELL, RANDOLPH W. SAWYER, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DOE v. CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2017cv01373
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOE
Defendant:
CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA , HEIDI ZEICH , JONATHAN SAWYER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BUSTILLO v. DANIELS, et al
as 1:2016cv00051
Plaintiff:
FERNANDO BUSTILLO
Defendant:
CHARLES DANIELS, DAVID LUKENS, J. SAWYER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BUSTILLO v. DANIELS, et al
as 1:2015cv02143
Plaintiff:
FERNANDO BUSTILLO
Defendant:
CHARLES DANIELS, DAVID LUKENS, J. SAWYER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SCHORR v. ROBERSON et al
as 1:2015cv01290
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW P. SCHORR
Defendant:
DENISE E. ROBERSON, RANDOLPH W. SAWYER, CASSANDRA A. MAXIMOUS and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0701
Sandusky Wellness Center, LLC, et al v. FCC, et al
as 14-1235
Petitioner:
Sandusky Wellness Center, LLC, Medical West Ballas Pharmacy, Ltd., Goodland Foods, Inc. and others
Respondent:
Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
Movant-Intervenor For Respondent:
Richie Enterprises, LLC
In re: Morris Coe-Bey, et al
as 13-5226
In Re - Petitioner:
In re: Morris Coe Bey, Suad Zainab Bahsoon Bey, Pletze Brown Bey and others
:
and
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.
