Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Finishing Touches Construction Inc. v. Finishing Touches Construction et al
as 2:2023cv02966
Plaintiff:
Finishing Touches Construction Inc.
Defendant:
Finishing Touches Construction and William Dees
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1127 Trademark Infringement
Dee v. The Columbus Distributing Company
as 2:2022cv04391
Plaintiff:
William Dee
Defendant:
The Columbus Distributing Company
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2617 Family and Medical Leave Act
CRAWFORD v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv14565
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM DEE CRAWFORD
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
King et al v. United States of America
as 2:2021cv01285
Plaintiff:
Caroline King, William Dee King, Tenesha King and others
Defendant:
USA and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
Jorge Abascal, et al v. 3M Company, et al
as 20-3614
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Gregory Stone, Ronnie Whitehead, Dennis Lietzow and others
Defendant / Appellant:
3M Company and Aearo Technologies LLC
Abascal et al v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2020cv01812
Plaintiff:
Paul Johnson, Rossel Ulloa, Gary Duke and others
Defendant:
3M Company and Aearo Technologies LLC
Sunday v. Ask-Carlson
as 1:2014cv00668
Plaintiff:
David William Dee Sunday
Defendant:
Ask-Carlson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Dutro et al v. County of Contra Costa et al
as 3:2012cv02972
Plaintiff:
Amber Dutro , Glenda Stripes , Sarah Dutro and others
Defendant:
Country of Contra Costa , Calvery Open Bible Church , City of Antioch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carter v. Georgia Department of Corrections
as 1:2010cv03390
Plaintiff:
William Dee Carter
Defendant:
Georgia Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carter v. Georgia Department of Corrections
as 5:2010cv00384
Plaintiff:
William Dee Carter
Defendant:
Georgia Department of Corrections
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.
