Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Wilson v. Vocera Communications, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv00171
Plaintiff:
Jordan Wilson
Defendant:
Vocera Communications, Inc., John N. McMullen, Sharon L. O'Keefe and others
Whitfield v. Vocera Communications, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv00114
Plaintiff:
Matthew Whitfield
Defendant:
Vocera Communications, Inc., Brent D. Lang, Howard E. Janzen and others
WATERMAN v. COHERENT, INC. et al
as 2:2021cv02623
Plaintiff:
MARC WATERMAN
Defendant:
II-VI INCORPORATED, BEVERLY KAY MATTHEWS, MICHAEL MCMULLEN and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22
Lawrence v. Coherent, Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv00808
Defendant:
Beverly Kay Matthews, Andreas W. Mattes, Coherent, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Richard Lawrence
SHIREY v. COHERENT, INC. et al
as 2:2021cv10698
Defendant:
BEVERLY KAY MATTHEWS, GARRY ROGERSON, COHERENT, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
JOSH SHIREY
Patrick Davis v. Janet Pearson, et al
as 19-2403
Defendant:
MICHELLE MCMULLEN, D. L. NAJI, JANET PEARSON and others
Defendant / Appellee:
JANET PEARSON, Correctional Health Care Administrator and SUSAN L. MCQUILLEN, Sued in their Official and Individual Capacities as State Actors under Color of Law Seeking Damages for Violations
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PATRICK DAVIS
Shawn Daniels v. Northwestern Human Services, et al
as 19-2259
Defendant / Appellee:
STACEY MCMULLEN, NORTHWESTERN HUMAN SERVICES, JEOVHANNA LEWIS and others
Defendant:
MICHEAL WENCROWICK
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SHAWN DANIELS
In re: Kim McMullen
as 16-1138
Petitioner:
In re: KIM MCMULLEN
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA SUPERIOR COURT
FIRST CHOICE BANK, INC. et al v. ADJODHA et al
as 3:2014cv06183
Petitioner:
FIRST CHOICE BANK, INC. , FIRST CHOICE LOAN SERVICES, INC. and NORMAN KOENIGSBERG
Respondent:
LEON ADJODHA, JONATHAN ALEXANDER, MICHAEL BANASIAK and others
Cause Of Action: 9 U.S.C. § 9
In re: Kim L. McMullen
as 14-3675
Petitioner:
In re: KIM MCMULLEN
Respondent:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY HUNTINGDON COUNTY
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.
