Cases 1 - 10 of 160
PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY et al v. OLYMPIA EARLY LEARNING CENTER et al
as 2:2023mc00149
Plaintiff:
PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY
Defendant:
OLYMPIA EARLY LEARNING CENTER, STEVE OLSON and ROSE HORGDAHL
Petitioner:
CYNTHIA LASPROGATA
Counter Claimant:
ALICIA MENDOZA, G.S.J., AMANDA MYRICK and others
Scott v. Splunk Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv01281
Plaintiff:
Robert Scott
Defendant:
Splunk Inc., Graham V. Smith, Mark Carges and others
Philips v. Splunk Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv01284
Plaintiff:
Mary Philips
Defendant:
Splunk Inc., Graham V. Smith, Mark Carges and others
L.B. FOSTER COMPANY v. BROGDEN et al
as 2:2023cv01642
Plaintiff:
L.B. FOSTER COMPANY
Defendant:
JR. BOBBY BROGDEN, KERRY MOORE and MILL MAN STEEL, INC. a Colorado headquartered corporation doing business as MAVRIK ENVIRONMENTAL & EXPLORATION PRODUCTS
STEELE v. NEAL et al
as 2:2023cv12034
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLEY STEELE
Defendant:
SIMONE NEAL, ARMID ERNEJA, HIJA JOHNSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Profit Point Tax Technologies Inc v. Dpad Group LLP, et al
as 23-1575
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PROFIT POINT TAX TECHNOLOGIES INC
Defendant / Appellee:
DPAD GROUP LLP, JOHN MANNING and DANIEL STEELE
Dixon v. Hill International, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv01374
Plaintiff:
Brian Dixon
Defendant:
Hill International, Inc., David Sgro, Raouf S. Ghali and others
Omar Steele v. Attorney General United States of America
as 22-2887
Petitioner:
OMAR ALBERTO STEELE
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Lawrence v. Steel Connect, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv01213
Plaintiff:
Richard Lawrence
Defendant:
Steel Connect, Inc., Warren G. Lichtenstein, Glen M. Kassan and others
Glover-Mott v. Herd et al
as 1:2022cv01070
Plaintiff:
MARILEE C. GLOVER-MOTT
Defendant:
Whitney Wolfe Herd, Anuradha B. Subramanian, Ann Mather and others
Nominal Defendant:
Bumble Inc.
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.
