Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Wesley-Keith Mullings v. , et alIn re: Wesley-Keith Mullings v. , et al
as 23-3170
Petitioner:
In re: WESLEY-KEITH MULLINGS
Respondent:
HARRIET ELAINE RAGHNAL, AISHA MARGARET SMITH, STATE OF NEW JERSEY and others
Wesley-Keith Mullings v. Harriet Raghnal, et al
as 23-2470
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WESLEY-KEITH MULLINGS, Holder in due course of Wesley Keith Mullings and holder in due course of Isaiah Keishon Mullings, sui juris, and Trustee of Wesley Keith Mullings Trust
Defendant / Appellee:
HARRIET ELAINE RAGHNAL, Bar #006762006, AISHA MARGARET SMITH, STATE OF NEW JERSEY and others
LIN-HENDEL et al v. DUPUIS et al
as 3:2023cv03956
Petitioner:
DR. CATHERINE G. LIN-HENDEL, PH.D. and DR. RUDOLF H. HENDEL, PH.D.
Respondent:
KATHERINE DUPIS, KAREN M. CASSIDY, THOMAS J. WALSH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
MULLINGS v. RAGHNAL et al
as 2:2022cv01294
Plaintiff:
WESLEY-KEITH: MULLINGS
Defendant:
HARRIET ELAINE RAGHNAL, AISHA MARGARET SMITH, STATE OF NEW JERSEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
WALSH v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2014cv02902
Petitioner:
THOMAS A. WALSH
Respondent:
LAWRENCE MAHALLY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF STATE PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WALSH v. KLOPOTOSKI et al
as 2:2008cv05273
Petitioner:
THOMAS A. WALSH
Respondent:
MICHAEL D. KLOPOTOSKI, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WALSH et al v. BIOMEDICAL TISSUE SERVICES, LTD. et al
as 2:2007cv03082
Plaintiff:
MARY ANN WALSH and THOMAS E. WALSH
Defendant:
BIOMEDICAL TISSUE SERVICES, LTD., REGENERATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC., SPINALGRAFT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
