Cases 61 - 70 of 72
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv00633
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
WILLIAMS v. GIORLA et al
as 2:2011cv06565
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WILLIAMS
Defendant:
LOUIS GIORLA, JOYCE ADAMS, GREGG PEOPLES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BELCH v. BAYER CROPSCIENCE, INC. et al
as 2:2011cv67304
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WILLIAM BELCH
Defendant:
BAYER CROPSCIENCE, INC. , 3M BUSINESS PRODUCT SALES, INC., PFIZER, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
HELD v. BERKS COUNTY JAIL
as 5:2011cv00614
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WILLIAM HELD
Defendant:
BERKS COUNTY JAIL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SUAREZ v. PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM (P.P.S.) et al
as 2:2011cv00507
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WILLIAM BECK SUAREZ
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM (P.P.S.), CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, PRISON HEALTH SERVICES (PHS) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Beard et al
as 1:2010cv00539
Plaintiff:
Michael Williams
Defendant:
Jeffrey A. Beard,, Michael Klopotoski and Unknown Medical Services
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MICHAEL WILLIAMS CONSULTING, LLC v. WYCKOFF HEIGHTS MEDICAL CENTER
as 2:2009cv04328
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WILLIAMS CONSULTING, LLC
Defendant:
WYCKOFF HEIGHTS MEDICAL CENTER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
WILLIAMS v. KERESTES et al
as 2:2009cv02674
Petitioner:
MICHAEL WILLIAMS
Respondent:
KERESTES, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2008cv02084
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
BLAYLOCK v. 3M, ET AL.
as 2:2008cv74111
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WILLIAM BLAYLOCK
Defendant:
3M, A-BEX CORPORATION, A.K. STEEL CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
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.
