Cases 41 - 50 of 63
Banks v. Roe et al
as 1:2017cv00304
Plaintiff:
Frederick Banks
Defendant:
Adrian Roe, Mark R Hornak, Robert Cessar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Banks v. Roe et al
as 5:2017cv00153
Plaintiff:
Frederick Banks
Defendant:
Adrian Roe, Mark R. Hornak, Robert Cessar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Banks v. Roe et al
as 2:2017cv06054
Plaintiff:
Frederick Banks
Defendant:
Adrian Roe, Mark R. Hornak, Robert Cessar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Banks v. Roe et al
as 6:2017cv00371
Plaintiff:
Frederick Banks
Defendant:
Adrian Roe, Mark R Hornak, Robert Cessar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith et al v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds London
as 5:2017cv00005
Defendant:
Certain Underwriters at Lloyds London
Plaintiff:
Christopher Scott Smith and Versatile Insurance Planner, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Insurance Contract
Walker v. Great West Casualty Company et al
as 3:2016cv00678
Defendant:
Great West Casualty Company, Groendyke Transport, Inc., Scott Smith and others
Plaintiff:
Loquisha Walker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence
Terry Holcomb, Sr., et al v. Steven McCraw, et al
as 16-50435
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TERRY HOLCOMB, SR., SCOTT SMITH, AMOS JAMES POSTELL and others
Defendant - Appellee:
STEVEN MCCRAW, In His Personal Capacity, JOSE ORTIZ, In His Personal Capacity, JOHN PELATH, In His Personal Capacity and others
Duke v. Sumlin et al
as 3:2016cv00201
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Maryland, Scott Smith and Johnny Sumlin
Petitioner:
Donnie Earl Duke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Page
as 3:2016cv00017
Plaintiff:
Joseph Scott Smith
Defendant:
Micheal Cortez Page
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Stephens
as 3:2015cv00358
Defendant:
William Stephens
Petitioner:
Rodney Scott Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
