Cases 51 - 60 of 1,992
WHITFIELD v. CDK GLOBAL, INC. et al
as 2:2022cv01729
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW WHITFIELD
Defendant:
CDK GLOBAL, INC., LESLIE A BRUN, BRIAN KRZANICH and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22 Securities Fraud
HARRIS v. ARMEL et al
as 2:2022cv00635
Petitioner:
WILLIE HARRIS
Respondent:
ERIC T. ARMEL, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01528
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01529
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
JAMES v. OLIVER et al
as 2:2022cv01376
Petitioner:
WILLIE JAMES
Respondent:
SUPT. LONIE OLIVER, LARRY KRASNER and JOSH SHAPIRO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
GULLEY v. USA
as 3:2022cv00049
Petitioner:
WILLIE GENE GULLEY, JR.
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
WILLIS et al v. MERCK & CO., INC. et al
as 2:2022cv01263
Plaintiff:
FRANCES WILLIS and RICK WILLIS
Defendant:
MERCK & CO., INC., MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP., JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
BATTEN et al v. MERCK & CO., INC. et al
as 2:2022cv20000
Plaintiff:
WILMA BATTEN and WILLIE BATTEN
Defendant:
MERCK & CO., INC., MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP and MCKESSON CORP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
WHITE v. GONZALES et al
as 5:2022cv01226
Plaintiff:
WILLIE WHITE, JR
Defendant:
SGT. TATIYANNA GONZALES, JANINE DONATE, WARDEN KYLE RUSSEL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WHITE v. MASSINI et al
as 5:2022cv01230
Plaintiff:
WILLIE WHITE
Defendant:
DARREL MASSINI, CLIFF KNAPPENBERGER, LCJ PRISON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
