Cases 71 - 80 of 95,226
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00118
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Snelson v. O'Malley
as 4:2024cv00286
Plaintiff:
Mary Snelson
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Interested Party:
SSA Office of General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Stanford v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
as 4:2024cv00114
Plaintiff:
Nader Stanford
Defendant:
Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Starnes v. Caroll et al
as 1:2024cv00077
Plaintiff:
Mylik Jaquan Starnes
Defendant:
Unknown Caroll, Unknown Russler, Unknown Lattner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Carr v. O'Malley
as 1:2024cv00030
Plaintiff:
Connie Elaine Carr
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Interested Party:
SSA Office of General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Barclift v. O'Malley
as 4:2024cv00262
Plaintiff:
Tiffany Nicole Barclift
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Interested Party:
SSA Office of General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Barnes et al v. Payne et al
as 4:2024mc09003
Plaintiff:
Nathan Barnes, Susannah Kilpatrick and Darren Kilpatrick
Defendant:
Lawrence Payne and Patricia Payne
Interested Party:
American Express
Dinkins v. USA
as 4:2024cv00559
Petitioner:
Robert O. Dinkins
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Dickerson v. Stobie
as 4:2024cv00560
Plaintiff:
Michelle Marryann Dickerson
Defendant:
Laura Hawk Stobie
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Walz v. O'Malley
as 4:2024cv00284
Plaintiff:
Rachel Walz
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Interested Party:
SSA Office of General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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.
