Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Vidal-Ramirez v. Pfizer, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv01073
Plaintiff:
Michael Vidal-Ramirez
Defendant:
Pfizer, Inc. and Carlton National Resources, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Vose v. Kilmartin, et al
as 24-1066
Plaintiff:
CARLTON VOSE
Defendant:
PETER F. KILMARTIN, GERALD J. COYNE, PATRICIA K. ROCHA and others
Vose v. Suttell et al
as 1:2023cv00039
Plaintiff:
Carlton Vose
Defendant:
Paul A Suttell, Maureen M. Goldberg, William P. Robinson, III and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Vose v. Kilmartin et al
as 1:2019cv00409
Defendant:
David Curtin, City of Pawtucket, Peter DiBiase, Esq. and others
Plaintiff:
Carlton Vose
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Vose v. City of Pawtucket et al
as 1:2018cv00620
Defendant:
City of Pawtucket, Peter Graham, Jess Venturi and others
Plaintiff:
Carlton Vose
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ESTATE OF DONALD GRENIER v. MAYHEW et al
as 1:2017cv00364
Plaintiff:
ESTATE OF DONALD GRENIER
Defendant:
MARY MAYHEW, CARLTON LEWIS, DAVID WHITE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Siracusa v. Marriott International Incorporated et al
as 3:2017cv01243
Plaintiff:
Jean Siracusa
Defendant:
Marriott International Incorporated, The Ritz Carlton Hotel Spa and Casina, RCPR Lessee GP and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ROUSELLE v. MAYHEW et al
as 1:2015cv00374
Plaintiff:
JEANNINE ROUSELLE
Defendant:
MARY MAYHEW and CARLTON LEWIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. Gero, et al
as 14-1755
Plaintiff:
DARREL ALLEN, KEVIN BACCHUS, ANTHONY M. BOVA and others
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GERALD JONES
Defendant:
RICHARD J. ROUSE, SUFFOLK COUNTY, RICHARD FEENEY and others
Defendant - Appellee:
CORRECTION OFFICER GERO and CORRECTION OFFICER OPONASET
Interested Party:
MASSACHUSETTS PAROLE BOARD
WIGGIN v. TOWN OF SEARSPORT
as 1:2013cv00409
Plaintiff:
CARLTON WIGGIN
Defendant:
TOWN OF SEARSPORT
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.
