Cases 1 - 10 of 9,087
Kolak v. Backerville, et al
as 24-1182
Plaintiff:
WALTER M.J. KOLAK
Defendant:
DENISE BACKERVILLE, MR. CARTER, ARAPHAHOE SHERIFF, ARAPAHOE COUNTY and others
Kelly v. Dixon (Volusia)
as 6:2024cv00830
Petitioner:
Ricky Raynard Kelly
Respondent:
Ricky D. Dixon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Garcia-Dixon v. Nova Mud, Inc. et al
as 6:2024cv00028
Plaintiff:
Veronica Garcia-Dixon
Defendant:
Nova Mud, Inc. and Christian Clayton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Tort/Motor Vehicle (P.I.)
RUMPH v. DIXON
as 4:2024cv00191
Petitioner:
TAVARES RUMPH
Respondent:
RICKY DIXON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Black et al v. Philips North America LLC et al
as 1:2024cv11152
Plaintiff:
Daniel Black, Sally Gadd, Barry Godofsky and others
Defendant:
Philips North America LLC, Philips Holding USA, Inc. and Philips RS North America LLC,
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
CASEY v. DIXON
as 4:2024cv00188
Plaintiff:
BRIAN M CASEY
Defendant:
RICKY DIXON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dixon v. The Texas Department of Public Safety et al
as 4:2024cv01624
Plaintiff:
Gregory D Dixon
Defendant:
The Texas Department of Public Safety, Homeland Security Investigations, Air Force Office of Special Investigations and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00091
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-5110
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Dixon v. HomeSense, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv03090
Plaintiff:
Vivian Dixon
Defendant:
HomeSense, LLC and The TJX Companies, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 nr 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.
