Cases 1 - 10 of 152
LU v. KERRY et al
as 2:2024cv01169
Plaintiff:
FRIEDRICH LU
Defendant:
CAMERON F KERRY, UNITED STATES, MERRICK GARLAND and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
EQT PRODUCTION COMPANY et al v. THISTLE et al
as 2:2024cv00112
Petitioner:
EQT PRODUCTION COMPANY and RICE DRILLING B LLC
Respondent:
HAROLD W THISTLE, JR and GAY E THISTLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other
Holland v. RiteAid Corp. et al
as 2:2023cv02962
Plaintiff:
DAVID HOLLAND and Harold Setliff
Defendant:
RiteAid Corp., John T Standley, Darren Karst and others
Petitioner:
RICHARD PATTERSON, RAFAEL LOPEZ and Jennifer DaSilva
USA v. Harold Mignott
as 23-2223
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
HAROLD MIGNOTT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIROMENTAL PROTECTION v. ONE BREWERY PLACE, INC. et al
as 2:2023cv00873
Plaintiff:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIROMENTAL PROTECTION
Defendant:
ONE BREWERY PLACE, INC., HAROLD B. DAVIDSON, JAMES RANDY DAVIDSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 9604 Comprehensive Envir. Comp. & Liab. Act (CERCLA)
Berezin v. Croskrey et al
as 1:2023cv00149
Plaintiff:
Samuel Berezin
Defendant:
Stephen E. Croskrey, John A. Dowdy, III, Richard Hendrix and others
Nominal Defendant:
Danimer Scientific, Inc.
Harold WarrenIn re: Harold Warren
as 23-1145
Petitioner:
In re: HAROLD WARREN
Respondent:
THE WORLD TRADE CENTER HEALTH PROGRAM and NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
Harold Pabon-Porras v. Attorney General United States of America
as 22-2975
Petitioner:
HAROLD MAURICIO PABON-PORRAS
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Monteleone v. View, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv00980
Nominal Defendant:
View, Inc. and CF Finance Acquisition Corp. II
Plaintiff:
James Monteleone
Defendant:
Rao Mulpuri, Vidul Prakash, Toby Cosgrove and others
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.
