Cases 61 - 70 of 6,590
BROWN et al v. COOPER et al
as 2:2024cv02862
Defendant:
EDWARDS JONES, LAKEYSHA COOPER and MARCOS ORTIZ
Plaintiff:
CORDIRO BROWN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Deandre Jones v. Superintendent Pine Grove SCI, et al
as 24-2158
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT PINE GROVE SCI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY INDIANA COUNTY and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff:
DEANDRE PAYTON JONES
David Jaroslawicz, et al v. M&T Bank Corp, et al
as 24-8025
Petitioner:
BELINA FAMILY and JEFF KRUBLIT
Respondent:
M&T BANK CORP, HUDSON CITY BANCORP INC, RENE F. JONES and others
David Jaroslawicz, et al v. M&T Bank Corp, et al
as 24-8024
Petitioner:
BELINA FAMILY and JEFF KRUBLIT
Respondent:
M&T BANK CORP, HUDSON CITY BANCORP INC, ROBERT G. WILMERS and others
DOE v. ODDO et al
as 3:2024cv00144
Defendant:
R. BOLLINGER, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, R.A. SETH JOHNSON and others
Plaintiff:
JEAN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. MCGINLEY et al
as 2:2024cv02759
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MONTOGMERY, THOMAS MCGINLEY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Petitioner:
KENNETH N. JONES, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02705
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02698
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02667
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 651 Occupational Safety/Health
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02665
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 651 Occupational Safety/Health
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.
