US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Cases 71 - 80 of 323,644
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01945
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv01925
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv01929
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
MORNINGSTAR v. THE HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY
as 2:2024cv01940
Plaintiff:
LUCIFER MORNINGSTAR
Defendant:
THE HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1362 ERISA
Decker v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 2:2024cv01932
Plaintiff:
Andrew Decker
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
DAVIS v. O'MALLEY
as 5:2024cv01927
Plaintiff:
LISA D DAVIS
Defendant:
MARTIN O'MALLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01947
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
WATKINS v. SUPERINTENDENT RIVELLO et al
as 5:2024cv01942
Petitioner:
LEWIS T. WATKINS
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT RIVELLO, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF LANCASTER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CASTRO v. POLYGLASS USA INC.
as 2:2024cv01944
Plaintiff:
JANILKA CASTRO
Defendant:
POLYGLASS USA INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01997
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
