Cases 121 - 130 of 167
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv00398
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
HINTON v. CITY OF CAMDEN et al
as 1:2010cv06670
Plaintiff:
DAYNA HINTON
Defendant:
CITY OF CAMDEN, CITY OF CAMDEN POLICE DEPARTMENT, CAMDEN COUNTY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
HINTON v. MARK et al
as 3:2010cv00305
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL HINTON
Defendant:
TIMOTHY MARK, RAYMOND SOBINA, PATTI MCKISSOCH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
MILLS et al v. CITY OF CAMDEN et al
as 1:2010cv06277
Plaintiff:
RON MILLS , ANGEL CARABALLO , WILLIAM BAYLOCK and others
Defendant:
CITY OF CAMDEN, CITY OF CAMDEN POLICE DEPARTMENT, CAMDEN COUNTY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv05117
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HINTON v. GAF CORPORATION et al
as 2:2010cv80781
Plaintiff:
WILL H. HINTON
Defendant:
GAF CORPORATION, ROCKWOOL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, PITTSBURGH CORNING CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HINTON v. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION
as 2:2010cv79292
Plaintiff:
LAURA HINTON
Defendant:
OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HINTON v. WHITE et al
as 3:2010cv03902
Plaintiff:
ANDREW HINTON
Defendant:
JEFFERY WHITE and LORENZO PETTWAY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HINTON v. MONMOUTH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE et al
as 3:2010cv03779
Plaintiff:
TERRY HINTON
Defendant:
MONMOUTH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, KIM GUADAGNO, WILLIAM FRAZIER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HINTON v. AC AND S INC et al
as 2:2010cv67655
Plaintiff:
ARTHUR E HINTON, JR
Defendant:
AC AND S INC , AP GREEN INDUSTRIES INC , ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES INC and others
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.
