Cases 1 - 10 of 948
Hill et al v. Toast, Inc,
as 1:2024cv11485
Plaintiff:
Meggan Hill, Benjamin Gorges, Christina Conte Wartinbee and others
Defendant:
Toast, Inc,
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Badolato v. O'Malley
as 1:2024cv00226
Plaintiff:
Michelle Badolato
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Rastiello v. R&Q Solutions LLC et al
as 1:2024cv11454
Plaintiff:
Patrick Rastiello
Defendant:
R&Q Solutions LLC, R&Q Insurance Holdings Ltd., Accredited Specialty Surety and Casualty Company, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Cronan v. Nerhona et al
as 1:2024cv00207
Plaintiff:
Laurie Cronan
Defendant:
Peter Nerhona, Daniel Ballirano, Kerry Travers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lane v. Wu et al
as 1:2024cv11273
Plaintiff:
Luanita Lane
Defendant:
Michelle Wu, Brittany Vo, London Lee and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
Graham v. Edmark
as 24-1456
Petitioner:
MELVIN C. GRAHAM
Respondent:
MICHELLE EDMARK, Warden, New Hampshire State Prison for Men
Ibarra v. Covidien LP et al
as 1:2024cv11113
Plaintiff:
Michelle Ibarra
Defendant:
Covidien LP and Sofradim Production SAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
LaRoe v. Twomey et al
as 3:2024cv30059
Plaintiff:
Pro se Litigant Kelly LaRoe
Defendant:
Paula Twomey, Jefferey Riley, Bureau of Special Appeals and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Howell v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, et al
as 24-1368
Plaintiff:
CURTIS L. HOWELL
Defendant:
MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, MICHELLE WU and BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
Howell v. Pine Street Inn, et al
as 24-1369
Plaintiff:
CURTIS L. HOWELL
Defendant:
PINE STREET INN, MICHELLE WU and BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
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.
