Cases 21 - 30 of 31
Loushonda Myers v. The State of North Carolina
as 13-2057
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LOUSHONDA MYERS, C.M., a minor child, A.M., a minor child and others
Defendant - Appellee:
THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, KRISTA L. BENNET, individually and in her official capacity as Facilitator with the North Carolina State Bar, FERN GUNN SIMEON, individually and in her official capacity as Deputy Counsel with the North Carolina State Bar and others
Loushonda Myers v. The State of North Carolina
as 13-1963
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LOUSHONDA MYERS, C.M., a minor child, A.M., a minor child and others
Defendant - Appellee:
THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, KRISTA L. BENNET, individually and in her official capacity as Facilitator with the North Carolina State Bar, FERN GUNN SIMEON, individually and in her official capacity as Deputy Counsel with the North Carolina State Bar and others
William Davis, II v. State of North Carolina
as 13-1715
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, II, and a "Minor J.F.D" as next best friend
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, "Pat McCory" individually and as Governor, WAKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, "Ramon Rojano" individually and as Director and WAKE COUNTY N.C., FAMILY COURT, "Donald Steven" Chief Superior Court Judge 10th Judicial District of Wake County North Carolina individually and in his official capacities
William Davis, II v. State of North Carolina
as 13-1627
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR., and a "Minor J.F.D" as next best friend
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, "Pat McCory" individually and as Governor, WAKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, "Ramon Rojano" individually as as Director and WAKE COUNTY N.C., FAMILY COURT, "Donald Steven" Chief Superior Court Judge 10th Judicial District of Wake County North Carolina individually and in his official capacities
Myers et al v. The State of North Carolina et al
as 5:2012cv00714
Plaintiff:
Loushonda Myers, C.M., A.M. and others
Defendant:
The State of North Carolina, Krista L. Bennet, Fern Gunn Simeon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 11-2325
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
William Davis, Jr. v. State of North Carolina
as 11-1420
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Governor Beverely Perdue, Individually And in Her official Capacity as Governor, And Predecessor Mike Easley, individually And official capacity as Governor, THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, WAKE COUNTY GOVERNMENT, David Cook individually, and in His official Capacity as County Manager of Wake County North Carolina and others
William Davis, Jr. v. Danielle Doyle
as 11-1418
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
DANIELLE DOYLE, Child Protective Services Social Worker of Wake County Human Services, of Cary North Carolina in her individual and official capacities, RAMON RAJANO, Director, Wake County Human Services of Raleigh North Carolina in his individual and official capacities, DAVID COOKE, Manager, Wake County Government of Raleigh North Carolina in his individual and official capacities and others
William Davis, Jr. v. Richard Crouthermel
as 11-1419
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR., next best friend of J.F.D., a Minor Child
Defendant - Appellee:
RICHARD CROUTHERMEL, individually, and in His official capacities as Wake County Attorney Advocate representing Wake County North Carolina Guardian Ad Litem Program
William Davis, Jr. v. Danille Doyle
as 11-1416
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR., next best friend of J.F.D., a Minor Child
Defendant - Appellee:
DANILLE DOYLE, individually, and in his official capacities as Wake County Social Worker representing Wake County, North Carolina Human Services
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.
