Cases 11 - 20 of 40
DAVIES v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2015cv00860
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVIES
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Nelson Ryder v. David Varano, et al
as 15-1669
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NELSON RYDER
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID VARANO, CS
Defendant - Numerous Parties See Appellee:
RHONDA ELLET, CDSCS, JANET BARTHOLOMEW, CEVC, MICHAEL CORBACIO and others
DAVIS, JR. v. BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY et al
as 3:2015cv00635
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVIS, JR.
Defendant:
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY, SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. LLC, SANOFI US SERVICES INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ADAMS et al v. BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB, et al.,
as 3:2014cv06872
Plaintiff:
THOMAS ADAMS , BARBARA ALKIRE , DELBERT L. AMOS and others
Defendant:
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY, SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. LLC, SANOFI US SERVICES INC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
DAVIS v. OVERMYER et al
as 1:2014cv00200
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVIS
Defendant:
MICHAEL OVERMYER, MURIN, MONGELLUZZO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
USA v. Robert Davie
as 14-2971
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
ROBERT DAVIES
DAVIES v. USA
as 2:2013cv00845
Petitioner:
ROBERT DAVIES
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
In Re: Robert Davie
as 12-3751
Petitioner:
In re: ROBERT DAVIES
Respondent:
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
EVANS et al v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE et al
as 2:2012cv02682
Plaintiff:
BYRON EVANS , ALVA EVANS , MIKE BARTRUM and others
Defendant:
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, NFL PROPERTIES LLC and JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 100
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SERP v. DAVIS et al
as 5:2012cv02552
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM K. SERP
Defendant:
ROBERT DAVIS, PATRICK J. CALLAHAN, CHARLES J. HOPKINS and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78 m(a) Securities Exchange Act
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.
