Cases 11 - 20 of 40
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv02127
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
FEAGIN v. ROMNEY et al
as 1:2018cv03134
Plaintiff:
EVETTE CALEN FEAGIN
Defendant:
MITT ROMNEY, JAMES TREFFINGER, CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
THE ESTATE OF JOSEPH GARRO v. BOROUGH OF LINDENWOLD et al
as 1:2016cv02253
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH GARRO
Defendant:
BOROUGH OF LINDENWOLD, THOMAS J. BRENNAN, KYLE KEATING and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HAYDEN v. UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP et al
as 2:2016cv00544
Plaintiff:
TAJEE HAYDEN
Defendant:
UPPER DARBY TOWNSHIP and BRIAN M. WEARSHING
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bryant Baynard v. Lazard Pineda, et al
as 15-3784
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BRYANT LEE BAYNARD
Defendant - Appellee:
22ND POLICE DISTRICT, OFFICER EDWIN OCASIO, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS and others
BAYNARD v. PINEDA et al
as 2:2015cv05865
Plaintiff:
BRYANT LEE BAYNARD
Defendant:
LAZARD PINEDA, KRISTIN POWERS, HAYDEN CHARLES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
THE NORTH WEST AMEXEM, FEZ PROVINCE et al v. WOLF et al
as 2:2015cv03606
Plaintiff:
DELILAH PASSE EL, R.LYNN HATSHEPSUT MA'ATKARE EL, NANYA AMIR EL and others
Defendant:
TOM WOLF , KATHLEEN KANE , MICHAEL NUTTER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
HANZ et al v. MONROEVILLE CHRISTIAN JUDEA FOUNDATION
as 2:2014cv00953
Plaintiff:
DIANE HANZ , CYNTHIA HAYDEN and DEBORAH WILSON-GREEN
Defendant:
MONROEVILLE CHRISTIAN JUDEA FOUNDATION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2014cv04202
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
FEAGIN v. HOFFMAN et al
as 2:2014cv03716
Plaintiff:
EVETTE C. FEAGIN
Defendant:
HOFFMAN and HAYDEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
