Cases 1 - 10 of 89
Ross v. Pike, et al
as 24-1249
Plaintiff:
KEVIN LEE ROSS
Defendant:
PIKE, Administrator at Somerset County Jail, D. GRAY, JAQUES, Sargent at Somerset County Jail and others
Jones v. Overtime Sports, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv30029
Plaintiff:
Paul Jones
Defendant:
Overtime Sports, Inc., Zack Weiner, Slam Media, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
ROSS v. PIKE et al
as 1:2024cv00016
Plaintiff:
KEVIN LEE ROSS
Defendant:
PIKE, D GRAY, JAQUES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
FLOYD v. WALDO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT et al
as 1:2023cv00379
Plaintiff:
SEAN J FLOYD
Defendant:
WALDO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, CODY LAITE, CASEY ASHEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv11929
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
STAPLES v. LIPPERT COMPONENTS INC et al
as 1:2022cv00356
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA STAPLES
Defendant:
LIPPERT COMPONENTS INC, FOREST RIVER INC and RV WHOLESALERS INC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
HARTLETT et al v. STATE OF MAINE et al
as 1:2022cv00185
Plaintiff:
BARBARA JEAN HARTLETT and ABRAHAM LEE STAPLES
Defendant:
STATE OF MAINE, JOANNE COOKSON, TAMIA KINGBURRY and others
Not Classified By Court:
MAINE ATTORNEY GENERAL - NON PRISONER IFP CASES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
In Re: Lu
as 22-1324
Petitioner:
FRIEDRICH LU
Respondent:
PAUL LAPROCINA, JR., MICHAEL J. LEPIZZERA, JR., SCOTT KEVIN DEMELLO and others
Aitken v. Staples, Inc.
as 1:2021cv11947
Plaintiff:
Marjorie Aitken
Defendant:
Staples, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Duckworth v. Staples, Inc.
as 1:2021cv11950
Plaintiff:
Sheila Duckworth
Defendant:
Staples, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
