Cases 1 - 10 of 15
CHENG v. BENTON et al
as 2:2024cv06567
Plaintiff:
JIA CHENG
Defendant:
ROBERT BENTON, JOHN J. BROWN, HAO (KEVIN) CHEN and others
FORD v. MERCER et al
as 2:2024cv04894
Defendant:
TINGO GROUP, INC., DARREN MERCER, HAO CHEN and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL FORD
RAGO v. MERCER et al
as 2:2023cv20749
Plaintiff:
AL RAGO
Defendant:
DARREN MERCER, HAO (KEVIN) CHEN, DOZY MMOBUOSI and others
SCOTT v. CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 1:2016cv06533
Plaintiff:
JOHN ANDRE SCOTT
Defendant:
CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv00412
Debtor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0157
SCOTT v. A C AND S, INC. et al
as 2:2011cv60116
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWIN SCOTT
Defendant:
A C AND S, INC. , ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC. , CELOTEX CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SCOTT v. FIBREBOARD CORPORATION
as 2:2010cv72543
Plaintiff:
JOHN M. SCOTT
Defendant:
FIBREBOARD CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Scott et al v. LTS Builders LLC et al
as 1:2010cv00581
Plaintiff:
John L Scott and Minnie L Scott
Defendant:
LTS Builders LLC, LTS Realty Company, Rene Giombetti and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Scott et al v. LTS Builders LLC et al
as 3:2010cv00581
Plaintiff:
John L Scott and Minnie L Scott
Defendant:
LTS Builders LLC, LTS Realty Company, Rene Giombetti and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
SCOTT et al v. A.C. AND S., INC, (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al
as 2:2009cv84486
Plaintiff:
FANNIE SCOTT and JOHN ARTHUR SCOTT
Defendant:
A.C. AND S., INC, (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY), A.P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., A.P. GREEN SERVICES, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
