Cases 11 - 20 of 23
William Webb, Jr.In re: William Webb, Jr.
as 21-1912
Respondent:
JOHN A. CERINO and WARDEN JAMES T VAUGHN CORRECTIONAL CENTER
Petitioner:
In re: WILLIAM JOSEPH WEBB, JR.
William Webb, Jr. v. Brian Chapman, et al
as 21-1663
Defendant / Appellee:
BRIAN J. CHAPMAN
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WILLIAM JOSEPH WEBB, JR.
Defendant:
LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN J. CHAPMAN
William Webb, Jr. v. Warden James T Vaughn Correcti, et al
as 21-1413
Defendant / Appellee:
ATTORNEY GENERAL DELAWARE and WARDEN JAMES T VAUGHN CORRECTIONAL CENTER
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WILLIAM JOSEPH WEBB, JR.
Webb v. GDWG Law Firm et al
as 1:2020cv01394
Plaintiff:
William J. Webb, Jr.
Defendant:
GDWG Law Firm and Dade Werb
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Webb v. Delaware Department of Justice et al
as 1:2020cv01177
Defendant:
City of Newark, John Doe, Newark Police Department and others
Plaintiff:
William J. Webb, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Webb v. May et al
as 1:2020cv01092
Respondent:
Warden Robert May and Kathleen Jennings
Petitioner:
William Joseph Webb, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Webb v. May
as 1:2020cv00938
Plaintiff:
William J. Webb, Jr.
Defendant:
Warden Robert May, James T. Vaughn Correctional Institute, Amos Calloway and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Webb v. Chapman et al
as 1:2020cv00270
Plaintiff:
William J. Webb, Jr.
Defendant:
Law Offices of Brian J. Chapman and Brian J. Chapman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Webb v. Remington Arms Company et al
as 4:2014cv01499
Plaintiff:
William Michael Webb
Defendant:
Tahsin Industrial Corp.
Cross_defendant:
Tahsin Industrial Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
WEBB v. A.R. WILFLEY & SONS et al
as 2:2009cv77752
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM W WEBB and WILLIAM W WEBB
Defendant:
A.R. WILFLEY & SONS, ACF VALVES, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
