Cases 91 - 100 of 733
PETERSON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 3:2021cv20684
Petitioner:
CARY LEE PETERSON
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
In re: Cary Peterson
as 21-3351
Petitioner:
In re: CARY LEE PETERSON
Respondent:
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION, RVPLUS INC and MICHAEL A. HAMMER
Intervenor:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
PETERSON v. AUTOZONE, INC.
as 2:2021cv05217
Plaintiff:
VINCENT PETERSON
Defendant:
AUTOZONE, INC.
3Rd Party Defendant:
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
DARRAGH v. BT AMERICAS, INC. et al
as 2:2021cv19948
Plaintiff:
PATRICIA DARRAGH
Defendant:
BT AMERICAS, INC., BT Group, PLC, NADJA RISSE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv19948
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
PETERSON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON
as 3:2021cv19730
Plaintiff:
NICOLE PETERSON
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SEC v. RVPlus Inc, et al
as 21-3046
Plaintiff / Appellee:
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Defendant:
RVPLUS INC
Defendant / Appellant:
CARY LEE PETERSON
PETERSON v. WATSON et al
as 2:2021cv04669
Plaintiff:
ALEX PETERSON
Defendant:
C/O/ KEISHA WATSON, C/O/ JOHN DOE ELBY and C/O/ JOHN DOE 2 KENNIZAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PETERSON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2021cv18754
Plaintiff:
NANCY PETERSON
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
TESTA v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al
as 3:2021cv18569
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY J. TESTA
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, SECRET SERVICE and others
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.
