Cases 31 - 40 of 118
In re: Kai Ingram
as 16-4188
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: KAI D. INGRAM
Defendant - Respondent:
DEBRA SAUERS, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and STEFANIE J. SALAVANTIS
Nominal Respondent:
JOHN E JONES, III
Jones v. Progressive
as 4:2016cv02279
Plaintiff:
Alexis E. Jones
Defendant:
Progressive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
JONES, M.D., P.C. v. CIGNA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY et al
as 2:2016cv01233
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL E. JONES, M.D., P.C.
Defendant:
CIGNA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, VIANT, INC. and ABC CORP 1-5
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
RIVERA v. LAKE COMO et al
as 3:2016cv00318
Plaintiff:
RICHARD RIVERA
Defendant:
LAKE COMO , KEVIN E. JONES, JR , ALEX FAY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-3532
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Yun v. Lowe et al
as 3:2015cv01640
Plaintiff:
Gloria Sun Jung Yun
Defendant:
Brien Lowe, Anthony J. Alexander and Charles E. Jones, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
In re: Thomas Provenzano
as 15-2900
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: THOMAS A. PROVENZANO
Defendant - Respondent:
MICHAEL WERNEROWICZ, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and MARK STEVEN MATTHEWS
Nominal Respondent:
JOHN E JONES, III
EDWARDS v. YATES et al
as 2:2015cv05780
Plaintiff:
ROBERT LEE EDWARDS
Defendant:
SHERRY YATES, GARY LANIGAN, OZVART and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Lonnie Spellman
as 15-2748
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: LONNIE SPELLMAN
Defendant - Respondent:
SECRETARY PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DEPUTY COLLINS, SUPERINTENDENT, Facility Manager and others
Nominal Respondent:
JOHN E JONES, III
JONES v. DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. et al
as 1:2015cv04682
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. JONES, JR.
Defendant:
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO U.S. HOLDINGS, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO CO., LTD. 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.
