Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Eckerd v. Lush et al
as 2:2022cv00125
Plaintiff:
Andrew William Eckerd
Defendant:
Nigel Lush, Keith Higgins, Glynn County Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smitty's Supply, Incorporated v. Lindsay Hegna, et al
as 19-30936
Plaintiff / Appellant:
STEPHEN D. KELLEY
Defendant / Appellant:
LINDSAY MORGAN HEGNA, Lindsay Baker Hegna, legally Lindsay Morgan Hegna
Plaintiff / Appellee:
SMITTY'S SUPPLY, INCORPORATED
Eckerd v. Kelley
as 2:2017cv00129
Plaintiff:
Andrew William Eckerd
Defendant:
Stephen D. Kelley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eckerd v. Kelley
as 1:2017cv04194
Plaintiff:
Andrew William Eckerd
Defendant:
Stephen D. Kelley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eckerd v. Cannon et al
as 2:2017cv00108
Plaintiff:
Andrew William Eckerd
Defendant:
Jennifer Steele Cannon and Stephen D. Kelley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eckerd v. Cannon et al
as 2:2017cv00100
Plaintiff:
Andrew William Eckerd
Defendant:
Jennifer Steele Cannon, Gregory C. Dozier and Stephen D. Kelley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kelley v. Smitty's Supply, Inc.
as 2:2017cv04711
Plaintiff:
Stephen D. Kelley
Defendant:
Smitty's Supply, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Eckerd v. The Georgia Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2017cv00011
Plaintiff:
Andrew William Eckerd
Defendant:
The Georgia Department of Corrections, State of Georgia, Jennifer S. Cannon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eckerd v. The Georgia Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2017cv00021
Plaintiff:
Andrew William Eckerd
Defendant:
The Georgia Department of Corrections, State of Georgia, Jennifer S. Cannon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kelley v. The Bank of New York Mellon
as 4:2013cv00130
Plaintiff:
Stephen D. Kelley
Defendant:
The Bank of New York Mellon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
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.
