Cases 81 - 90 of 152
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv01762
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LEPRE v. DOMESTIC RELATIONS OF SUSQUEHANNA COUNTY et al
as 2:2014cv01650
Plaintiff:
GERALD S. LEPRE, JR.
Defendant:
DOMESTIC RELATIONS OF SUSQUEHANNA COUNTY, CHRISTINE LUKUS, ARTHUR R. TILSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SIMMERS v. ELO et al
as 2:2014cv06609
Plaintiff:
JAMES SIMMERS
Defendant:
JAMES ELO, MIKE KELLY, TIMOTHY DEERY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
REYES v. BOUDRIA et al
as 2:2014cv00673
Plaintiff:
SIMONE REYES
Defendant:
JACQUELIN BOUDRIA, LAWRENCE BOUDRIA, ABC, INC. (1-5) and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hatton v. Lake Region Urgent Care, P.C. et al
as 3:2013cv03004
Plaintiff:
Natalya Levin Hatton
Defendant:
Lake Region Urgent Care, P.C. and John and Jane Does 1-5
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GOSSELIN v. GOSSELIN et al
as 5:2013cv04989
Plaintiff:
KATE GOSSELIN
Defendant:
JONATHAN K. GOSSELIN, ROBERT HOFFMAN and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-20
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1030 Federal Computer Fraud & Abuse Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv04734
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
Leighton et al v. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C. et al
as 1:2013cv02018
Plaintiff:
Michael L. Leighton and Nancy A. Leighton
Defendant:
Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C. , Chesapeake Energy Corporation , Nomac Drilling, L.L.C. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Torts to Land
FENKELL v. DRAUCKER et al
as 2:2013cv04272
Plaintiff:
DAVID B. FENKELL
Defendant:
CARL A. DRAUCKER, SQUIRE SANDERS US LLP and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-5
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Mobley v. Lantz et al
as 1:2013cv01804
Plaintiff:
Gerry Mobley, Jr.
Defendant:
Lantz, Morrison, Harman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
