Cases 21 - 30 of 41
Rochester v. Tuesdale et al
as 6:2012cv02746
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
Ms Tuesdale, Mr Ragland, Mr Dillard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Julian Rochester v. C. Harcuff
as 12-7474
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JULIAN EDWARD ROCHESTER
Defendant - Appellee:
C. HARCUFF, Lieutenant, SERGEANT ATTWOOD, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER HAYNE and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2012cv02012
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Rochester v. Florian et al
as 6:2012cv01985
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
Chris Florian, Bob Peele, C M Hess and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Malcolm Muhammad v. C. Stapleton
as 12-6724
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MALCOLM MUHAMMAD
Defendant - Appellee:
C. STAPLETON, W. R. HENSLEY and RANDY MATHENA
Defendant:
M. STANFORD, B. RARIZEE, K. MASSEY and others
Muhammad v. Stanford et al
as 7:2011cv00610
Defendant:
D. Crabtree, K. Givens, W. R. Hensley and others
Plaintiff:
Malcolm Muhammad
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rochester v. Harcuff et al
as 8:2011cv02340
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
C Harcuff, Attwood, Root and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dixon v. McNair Law Firm PA
as 9:2011cv02338
Plaintiff:
W R Dixon
Defendant:
McNair Law Firm PA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Legal Malpractice
W&R Investment Limited Partnership v. Comcast of Virginia, Inc.
as 1:2011cv00301
Plaintiff:
W&R Investment Limited Partnership
Defendant:
Comcast of Virginia, Inc.
Counter_claimant:
Comcast of Virginia, Inc.
Counter_defendant:
W&R Investment Limited Partnership
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Carter v. Harvey et al
as 3:2010cv00715
Plaintiff:
Leonard Carter, Jr.
Defendant:
A. P. Harvey, Y. M. Taylor, J. Combs and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
