Cases 21 - 30 of 34
MCKENZIE v. WETZEL et al
as 1:2014cv00320
Plaintiff:
JUSTIN MCKENZIE
Defendant:
JOHN WETZEL, DORINA VARNER, MICHAEL OVERMYER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CUPERSMITH et al v. PIAKER & LYONS, P.C. et al
as 1:2014cv05681
Plaintiff:
NEAL A. CUPERSMITH , FRANCES CUPERSMITH , CYNTHIA ROBBINS and others
Defendant:
PIAKER & LYONS, P.C. , RONALD L. SIMONS and TIMOTHY N. PAVENTI
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
IGLESIAS v. MROZEK et al
as 1:2014cv00022
Plaintiff:
DAVIS IGLESIAS
Defendant:
MROZEK, SGT. WILLIAMS, HIDALGO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DITTMAN INCENTIVE MARKETING v. GLOBAL EVENTS PARTNERS, INC.
as 3:2013cv06478
Plaintiff:
DITTMAN INCENTIVE MARKETING
Defendant:
GLOBAL EVENTS PARTNERS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HEATH v. DITTMAN et al
as 1:2013cv00281
Plaintiff:
JORDAN HEATH
Defendant:
KEVIN DITTMAN, SCI FOREST DIETARY DEPT., GLENN MCQUOWN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv00850
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
DITTMAN et al v. FOSTER WHEELER COMPANY
as 2:2011cv33328
Plaintiff:
EARL C DITTMAN and CREIGHTON E MILLER
Defendant:
FOSTER WHEELER COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
DITTMAN et al v. STATES STEAMSHIP CO. et al
as 2:2011cv33326
Plaintiff:
EARL C DITTMAN , WILLARD E BARTEL and CREIGHTON E MILLER
Defendant:
STATES STEAMSHIP CO., LYKES BROS. STEAMSHIP CO., CENTRAL GULF LINES STEAMSHIP CO. and others
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
DITTMAN et al v. ACANDS, INC.
as 2:2011cv33327
Plaintiff:
EARL C DITTMAN and WILLIARD E BARTEL
Defendant:
ACANDS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
DITTMAN v. MANVILLE CORPORATION ASBESTOS DISEASE COMPENSATION FUND
as 2:2011cv33329
Plaintiff:
EARL C DITTMAN
Defendant:
MANVILLE CORPORATION ASBESTOS DISEASE COMPENSATION FUND
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
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.
