Cases 91 - 100 of 156
Holmes v. Keen et al
as 1:2013cv00964
Plaintiff:
Marlon T. Holmes
Defendant:
Daniel S. Keen, Mike Morrow, Brian Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morrow v. Spence et al
as 3:2013cv00612
Plaintiff:
John Boyd Morrow
Defendant:
Spence, Franklin County Jail, K Shay and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morrow v. Keen et al
as 3:2013cv00614
Plaintiff:
John Boyd Morrow
Defendant:
Keen, Weller, State of Franklin County PA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morrow v. Hull et al
as 3:2013cv00613
Plaintiff:
John Boyd Morrow
Defendant:
Mike Hull, John Powilson and Applegate Inc. and Owner
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MORROW et al v. COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY, PENNSYLVANIA
as 2:2013cv01032
Plaintiff:
THOMAS MORROW and VALERIE MORROW
Defendant:
COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY, PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Morrow v. Wetzel et al
as 3:2013cv00437
Plaintiff:
John Boyd Morrow
Defendant:
John Wetzel, Lauren Sulcove, Franklin County Jail and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morrow v. Hull et al
as 3:2013cv00309
Plaintiff:
John Boyd Morrow
Defendant:
Mike Hull, John Powilson and Applegate Inc. and Owner
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Litwin v. Human Genome Sciences Inc. et al
as 1:2012cv00979
Plaintiff:
Joan Litwin
Defendant:
Human Genome Sciences Inc., H. Thomas Watkings, Argeris N. Karabelas and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MONTGOMERY et al v. MORROW et al
as 2:2012cv02009
Plaintiff:
GLENN MONTGOMERY and PHILIP TERRY
Defendant:
DEAN A. MORROW, SR., ANTHONY STRONG, GILBERT MORROW and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1051
SUTLIFF et al v. MARK MORROW STAMPS, INC. et al
as 2:2012cv00410
Plaintiff:
LAWRENCE W. SUTLIFF and ANNA SUTLIFF
Defendant:
MARK MORROW STAMPS, INC. and JOHN H. LANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
