Cases 71 - 80 of 106
Phillip Wood v. Elizabeth Hogan, et al
as 14-2951
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PHILLIP WOOD
Defendant:
ELIZABETH HOGAN, JENNA CACCESE, RICCARDO GRIPPALDI and others
Defendant - Appellee:
DARIUS CHACINSKI
George v. Kerestes et al
as 3:2014cv00633
Petitioner:
Darius George
Respondent:
John Kerestes, Commonwealth of PA, Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
KELLEY v. RAO 10 INC.
as 2:2013cv07557
Plaintiff:
DARIUS KELLEY
Defendant:
RAO 10 INC.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
FLEWELLEN v. FOLINO et al
as 2:2013cv07399
Petitioner:
DARIUS FLEWELLEN
Respondent:
LOUIS FOLINO, SETH WILLIAMS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ODOM-WOODLIN et al v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2013cv07163
Plaintiff:
DANIEL ODOM-WOODLIN , DARIUS WOODLIN , DANIEL WOODLIN and others
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, VARELA, ORITZ and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv01698
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
BAGGS et al v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE et al
as 2:2013cv05309
Plaintiff:
STEVIE BAGGS , AARON BAILEY , JENNIFER BAILEY and others
Defendant:
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, NFL PROPERTIES, L.L.C., RIDDELL, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Anant Tripati v. Mark Hale, et al
as 13-3567
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANANT KUMAR TRIPATI
Defendant - Appellee:
MARK W. HALE, DARIUS HOLMES, DANIEL L. CONN and others
TRIPATI v. HALE et al
as 2:2013cv00830
Plaintiff:
ANANT KUMAR TRIPATI
Defendant:
MARK W. HALE, DARIUS HOLMES, DANIEL L. CONN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv00576
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
