Cases 1 - 10 of 57
Liptok v. City of Pottsville, PA, et al
as 3:2023cv01303
Plaintiff:
John J. Liptok
Defendant:
City Of Pottsville Pa., et al, City Council, Dorothy Botto and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
LIPTOK v. CITY OF POTTSVILLE PA., ET AL
as 2:2023cv02942
Plaintiff:
JOHN J. LIPTOK
Defendant:
CITY OF POTTSVILLE PA., ET AL, CITY COUNCIL, DOROTHY BOTTO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv01320
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
MARTINEZ v. CITY OF ASBURY PARK et al
as 3:2020cv08710
Defendant:
COUNTY OF MONMOUTH, BOROUGH OF BELMAR, JOHN DOE OFFICERS 1-14 and others
Plaintiff:
GUSTAVO MARTINEZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BRENES v. THE CITY OF ASBURY PARK et al
as 3:2019cv22204
Defendant:
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF ASBURY PARK, JAMES N BUTLER, DAVID KELSO and others
Plaintiff:
RICARDO E. BRENES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00741
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Movant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
SMITH v. PITTSBURGH GUITARS OWNER
as 2:2016cv01736
Plaintiff:
DEWITT THOMAS SMITH, JR.
Defendant:
PITTSBURGH GUITARS OWNER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. CHIEF POASTMASTER GENERAL
as 2:2016cv01737
Plaintiff:
DEWITT THOMAS SMITH, JR.
Defendant:
CHIEF POASTMASTER GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. UMPC MERCY HOASPITALS USA CHIFE DIRECTOR AN ASSIST DIRECTORRRRR
as 2:2016cv01738
Plaintiff:
DEWITT THOMAS SMITH, JR.
Defendant:
UMPC MERCY HOASPITALS USA CHIFE DIRECTOR AN ASSIST DIRECTORRRRR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. UNITED STATES POASTMASTER GENERAL
as 2:2016cv01657
Plaintiff:
DEWITT THOMAS SMITH, JR.
Defendant:
UNITED STATES POASTMASTER GENERAL
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.
