Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Barth v. Town of Waterboro, et al
as 24-1170
Plaintiff:
JOHN S. BARTH
Defendant:
TOWN OF WATERBORO, GARY LAMB, SAMUEL G. JOHNSON and others
Dubois v. Alves, et al
as 22-1704
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PAUL DUBOIS
Plaintiff:
NATHANIAL DUBOIS and ASHLEY DUBOIS
Defendant / Appellee:
NELSON ALVES, COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, CLAUDIA DUBOIS and others
Davis v. McManus
as 20-1582
Plaintiff / Appellee:
HERBERT DAVIS
Defendant:
STEPHEN M. MEADE, in his individual capacity and PAUL W. MURPHY, in his individual capacity
Interested Party:
BRIAN FAHY, RICHARD TEAHAN, KATHRYN HINMAN and others
Defendant / Appellant:
STEPHEN C. MCMANUS, in his individual capacity
Hanson v. Rockingham County Department, et al
as 13-1205
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL HANSON
Defendant - Appellee:
STEPHEN CHURCH, in his official capacity as Superintendent of Rockingham County Department of Corrections, LIEUTENANT HORNE, Lieutenant, GEORGE HASELTINE and others
Defendant:
LIEUTENANT CONSENTINO, JOHN BLOMEKE, in his official capacity as Assistant Superintendent of Rockingham County Department of Corrections, LIEUTENANT TRAINOR and others
Hanson v. Haseltine, et al
as 12-1282
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL HANSON
Defendant:
STEPHEN CHURCH, in his official capacity as Superintendent of Rockingham County Department of Corrections, JOHN BLOMEKE, in his official capacity as Assistant Superintendent of Rockingham County Department of Corrections, FNU HORNE, Lieutenant and others
Defendant - Appellee:
GEORGE HASELTINE, a/k/a FNU Hazelton
Watson v. Owens, et al
as 11-2128
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LAWRENCE WATSON
Defendant - Appellee:
ANTHONY OWENS, in his individual and official capacity, UNKNOWN CLERK, in her individual and official capacity, STEPHEN E. NEEL, Justice, in his individual and official capacity and others
Anderson, et al v. Hannaford Brothers Co., et al
as 10-2450
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL MIEHLE, ARLINE NENNI, SAM MICALIZZI, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROBERT HANSON, LORI VALBURN, PAMELA WILLIAMS and others
Defendant:
KASH N KARRY FOOD STORES INC., d/b/a Sweetbay Supermarkets, a/k/a Sweetbay Liquors and DELHAIZE AMERICA INC., d/b/a Sweetbay
Defendant / Appellee:
HANNAFORD BROTHERS COMPANY
In Re: Hannaford Bros Co. Cust
as 10-2450
Plaintiff - Appellee:
PAMELA WILLIAMS, LORI VALBURN, SARAH GAGNON and others
Plaintiff:
BODYWORKS HEALTH AND FITNESS CENTER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, d/b/a Planet Fitness, BODYWORKS MANAGEMENT COMPANY, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, d/b/a Planet Fitness and THOMAS T. GRIMSDALE, III
Defendant - Appellant:
HANNAFORD BROTHERS CO.
Defendant:
KASH N KARRY FOOD STORES INC., d/b/a Sweetbay Supermarkets, a/k/a Sweetbay Liquors and DELHAIZE AMERICA INC., d/b/a Sweetbay
In Re: Hannaford Bros Co. Cust
as 10-2384
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN ANDERSON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, MICHAEL CYR, ELIZABETH DOWD, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated and others
Plaintiff:
BODYWORKS HEALTH AND FITNESS CENTER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, d/b/a Planet Fitness, BODYWORKS MANAGEMENT COMPANY, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, d/b/a Planet Fitness, LEONARD ASSNER, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated and others
Defendant - Appellee:
KASH N KARRY FOOD STORES INC., d/b/a Sweetbay Supermarkets, a/k/a Sweetbay Liquors, DELHAIZE AMERICA INC., d/b/a Sweetbay and HANNAFORD BROTHERS CO.
Mead v. Independence Association, et al
as 10-1790
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JANE MEAD
Defendant - Appellee:
INDEPENDENCE ASSOCIATION, CHRISTINE BRADEN, individually and in her official capacity as Licensor, Division of Licensing and Regulatory Services for Maine Department of Health and Human Services and CHRISTINE COBB, individually and in her official capacity as Director, Division of Licensing and Regulatory Services for Maine Department of Health and 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.
