Cases 1 - 10 of 81
Dunlap v. Evans
as 1:2026cv05461
Plaintiff:
Ronald Dunlap
Defendant:
Timothy Evans
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
EVANS v. CITY OF DURHAM et al
as 1:2026cv00181
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY EVANS
Defendant:
CITY OF DURHAM, JACK CATES, JR., ERWIN BAKER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Evans v. Bisignano
as 7:2025cv00538
Plaintiff:
Timothy Evans
Interested Party:
SSA-Office of General Counsel
Defendant:
Frank J. Bisignano
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
EVANS v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2024vv02078
Petitioner:
TIMOTHY EVANS
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
FOERST v. FOERST et al
as 5:2024cv05224
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY EVAN FOERST
Defendant:
BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT, COLIN GERARD FOERST and JEREMY ANDERSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Evans v. Phillips et al
as 3:2024cv00137
Plaintiff:
Timothy Evans
Defendant:
Amber L. Phillips and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bey et al v. Cook County Circuit Court et al
as 1:2023cv16555
Plaintiff:
Hannibal Mu Bey and Ardis M Canady
Defendant:
Cook County Circuit Court, Waiver Court and Timothy Evans
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Evans v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv03900
Plaintiff:
Timothy Evans
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv14778
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
EVANS v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv28885
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY EVANS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC 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.
