Cases 41 - 50 of 21,134
COTTON v. MCCAFFRY
as 2:2024cv01345
Plaintiff:
DURELL H. COTTON, JR.
Defendant:
MCCAFFRY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILSON et al v. EVESHAM TOWNSHIP SCHOOL DISTRICT
as 1:2024cv05812
Plaintiff:
BREE WILSON and H. W.
Defendant:
EVESHAM TOWNSHIP SCHOOL DISTRICT
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1400 Civil Rights of Handicapped Child
TROY et al v. KUHN
as 1:2024cv04039
Plaintiff:
CHRISTIAN TROY, JAVON HALL, ALDO NAVAS and others
Defendant:
VICTORIA KUHNS, COMMISSIONER VICTORIA L. KUHN and JOHN AND JANE DOE CORRECTIONS OFFICERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Whaley v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, County of Dauphin et al
as 1:2024cv00742
Plaintiff:
George H. Whaley, Jr.
Defendant:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, County of Dauphin and Officer Natalie
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02940
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
SILVERBERG v. DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. et al
as 2:2024cv00924
Plaintiff:
RICHARD J. SILVERBERG
Defendant:
DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC., DOW, INC., CORTEVA, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
DUBOSE v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
as 2:2024cv01694
Plaintiff:
ZUMAR H. DUBOSE
Defendant:
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
Richard Silverberg v. DuPont De Nemours Inc, et al
as 24-1774
Plaintiff:
RICHARD J. SILVERBERG, Esq.
Defendant:
DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC, DOW INC, CORTEVA INC and others
Richard Silverberg v. DuPont De Nemours Inc, et al
as 24-1775
Plaintiff:
RICHARD J. SILVERBERG, Esq.
Defendant:
DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC, DOW INC, CORTEVA INC and others
O'Neill v. ZeroFox Holdings, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00470
Plaintiff:
Shannon O'Neill
Defendant:
ZeroFox Holdings, Inc., James C. Foster, Todd P. Headley and others
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.
