Cases 21 - 30 of 30
Bridges v. Whidden et al
as 3:2011cv01985
Petitioner:
David Bridges
Respondent:
Whidden and Richard Reeves
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Reeves v. Ernst & Young LLP
as 3:2011cv00360
Plaintiff:
William Reeves
Defendant:
Ernst & Young LLP
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Thompson v. Reeve et al
as 3:2011cv00031
Plaintiff:
Melvin Thompson
Defendant:
Susan C. Reeve, Michelle T. Angers, Alan Gannuscio and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cameron et al v. Olin Corp et al
as 3:2010cv01521
Plaintiff:
LaTresa Cameron , Reeves D. Cameron , Wilson R. Cameron and others
Defendant:
Olin Corp , Winchester Repeating Arms Company and U.S. Repeating Arms Company, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Baldwin et al v. Reeves et al
as 3:2009cv01657
Plaintiff:
Jewel Baldwin, Charles Reeves, Thomas Weeks and others
Defendant:
Bayer Corp, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc and Bayer Schering Pharma AG
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Bottone et al v. Bridgeport et al
as 3:2009cv00797
Plaintiff:
Timothy Bottone, Mathew Deysenroth, Robert Diaz and others
Defendant:
City of Bridgeport, Bridgeport Civ Svc Comm and Ralph Jacobs
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2009cv00669
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Reeves v. Coopchik
as 3:2008cv01544
Plaintiff:
Nina Reeves
Defendant:
Scott Coopchik
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Bridges v. Strange et al
as 3:2008cv01353
Plaintiff:
David E. Bridges, II
Defendant:
Strange, Richard Reeves and Boath
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bottone et al v. Bridgeport et al
as 3:2008cv01320
Plaintiff:
Timothy Bottone, Timothy Bottone, Timothy Bottone and others
Defendant:
City of Bridgeport, Bridgeport Civ Svc Comm and Ralph Jacobs
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
