Cases 1 - 10 of 14
CROWN CASTLE AS LLC v. VICTORVILLE TREASURE HOLDINGS LLC
as 2:2021cv00892
Plaintiff:
CROWN CASTLE AS LLC
Defendant:
VICTORVILLE TREASURE HOLDINGS LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv01103
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv01064
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
MARCUM v. COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC et al
as 2:2019cv03873
Defendant:
PERCHERON, LLC, CROWN CASTLE INTERNATIONAL CORP., CROWN CASTLE INTERNATIONAL I and others
Plaintiff:
KERSTIN R. MARCUM and SCOTT R. MARCUM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
BITTNER v. CROWN CASTLE USA, INC. et al
as 2:2018cv00535
Plaintiff:
JEAN BITTNER
Defendant:
CROWN CASTLE USA, INC. and THE LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
CROWN CASTLE NG EAST LLC v. BOROUGH OF DOYLESTOWN et al
as 2:2018cv01211
Plaintiff:
CROWN CASTLE NG EAST LLC
Defendant:
BOROUGH OF DOYLESTOWN and BOROUGH OF DOYLESTOWN ZONING HEARING BOARD
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 33
CROWN CASTLE NG EAST LLC v. ABINGTON TOWNSHIP
as 2:2017cv04169
Plaintiff:
CROWN CASTLE NG EAST LLC
Defendant:
ABINGTON TOWNSHIP
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 (b)(3) Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991
CROWN CASTLE NG EAST LLC v. TOWNSHIP OF HAVERFORD, PENNSYLVANIA
as 2:2017cv02333
Plaintiff:
CROWN CASTLE NG EAST LLC
Defendant:
TOWNSHIP OF HAVERFORD, PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0151
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00510
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
ABINGTON TOWNSHIP v. CROWN CASTLE NG EAST LLC
as 2:2016cv05357
Plaintiff:
ABINGTON TOWNSHIP
Defendant:
CROWN CASTLE NG EAST LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
