Cases 11 - 15 of 15
Raymond Alves, et al v. Glenn Ferguson, et al
as 08-2882
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND ALVES, RICHARD BAGAROZY, GRADY BROWN and others
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSEPH ARUANNO
Defendant - Appellant:
CORRECTIONAL MED SYS
Defendant - Appellee:
DEVON BROWN, Past Commissioner, DOC, et al, GOV. JOHN CORZINE, Past Commissioner, DOC, et al, GEORGE HAYMAN, Past Commissioner, DOC, et al and others
Defendant:
OSCAR TORRES, DAVID SAMSON, Esq., JAMES W. SMITH and others
Defendant - Non-Participating:
ALAN G. KAUFMAN, Director, Division of Mental Health Services and DEVON BROWN, Past Commissioner, DOC, et al
Raymond Alves, et al v. Glenn Ferguson, et al
as 08-1804
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND ALVES, ROBERT ANDREW MCGARREY, RICHARD BAGAROZY and others
Defendant - Appellee:
TOM CALABRESE, Program Coordinator, JAMES DAVY, Program Coordinator, GLENN FERGUSON, Program Coordinator and others
Defendant:
OSCAR TORRES, Officer, DAVID SAMSON, Esq., DEVON BROWN and others
Not Party - Appellant:
JOSEPH ARUANNO
WALKER v. E.D. BULLARD et al
as 2:2008cv61398
Plaintiff:
JOHN WALKER, JOHN WALKER, JOHN WALKER and others
Defendant:
E.D. BULLARD, ATLAS TURNER, INC., ATLAS TURNER, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
GLENN v. AQUA-CHEM INC et al
as 2:2007cv64650
Plaintiff:
JOHN WALKER GLENN
Defendant:
AQUA-CHEM INC, BORG WARNER MORSE TEC INC., CERTAINTEED CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
ALVES, et al v. FERGUSON, et al
as 2:2001cv00789
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND ALVES , RICHARD BAGAROZY , GRADY BROWN and others
Defendant:
GAIL FERGUSON , DAVID SAMSON , ALAN G. KAUFMAN and others
Consol_defendant:
OSCAR TORRES , JAMES DAVY and GRACE ROGERS
Consol_plaintiff:
ROBERT ANDREW MCGARREY , WILLIAM H. MOORE and MARY ANN HYSLER
Intervenor_plaintiff:
ROBERT DEAVERS
Consol_cross_claimant:
CMS MEDICAL SERVICE
Consol_cross_defendant:
GWENDOLYN HARRIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
