Cases 1 - 9 of 9
PYSER v. KUTZTOWN UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 5:2019cv05581
Defendant:
DESIREE REASONER, CHRISTOPHER WALLACE, KUTZTOWN UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA and others
Plaintiff:
CASSIDY PYSER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
ADELMAN et al v. JACOBS et al
as 2:2018cv00607
Plaintiff:
DANIEL ADELMAN and JENNIFER ADELMAN
Defendant:
ANDREW JACOBS , TODD MODENA , BRIAN MARKUS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
COLORITO v. ARAMARK
as 2:2016cv00597
Plaintiff:
RALPH COLORITO
Defendant:
ARAMARK
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
DiMarco v. Aramark Management Services
as 4:2015cv01040
Plaintiff:
Patricia DiMarco
Defendant:
Aramark Management Services
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
ROSADO v. ARAMARK et al
as 2:2014cv03033
Plaintiff:
JUAN ROSADO
Defendant:
ARAMARK , ARAMARK CORPORATION , ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES and others
Cross_claimant:
KALU , CORIZON HEALTH, INC. , JAMES ARNONE and others
Cross_defendant:
ARAMARK , ARAMARK CORPORATION , ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL FACILITY SERVICES, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KENNEDY et al v. ARAMARK HOLDINGS CORPORATION et al
as 2:2013cv02678
Plaintiff:
CHAL D. KENNEDY, SR.
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, LLC , WALTER FLAHERTY , VERONICA LEMON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
DAWKINS v. ARAMARK et al
as 2:2009cv01342
Plaintiff:
BRANDI L. DAWKINS
Defendant:
ARAMARK, WASHINGTON & JEFFERSON COLLEGE and UNUM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
TRAVILLION v. ALLEGHENY COUNTY BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2007cv00928
Plaintiff:
JAMAR L. TRAVILLION
Defendant:
ALLEGHENY COUNTY BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS, DAN ONORATO, RAMON R. RUSTIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
RODGERS v. MOLINO et al
as 2:2006cv05622
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER J. RODGERS
Defendant:
ANTHONY MOLINO, ANTHONY MOLINO, METHODIST HOSPITAL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
