Cases 51 - 60 of 108
Rolph v. Rolph et al
as 1:2016cv00594
Plaintiff:
John Michael Rolph, II
Defendant:
Spring Grove Institute
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Buckley v. Cannon et al
as 2:2015cv04584
Plaintiff:
Kathleen Buckley
Defendant:
Jennifer Buckley Cannon, John Michael Buckley and John Dennis Buckley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
MILLER v. SKEEN
as 1:2015cv00844
Plaintiff:
JOHN MICHAEL MILLER
Defendant:
VICKIE O'NEAL SKEEN and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Morgan v. Quinn et al
as 5:2015cv03773
Plaintiff:
John Michael Morgan
Defendant:
J Quinn and Sgt Cozolli
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Morgan v. Jones et al
as 5:2015cv03607
Plaintiff:
John Michael Morgan
Defendant:
Jeremy Jones, Unknown Officer #2 and Unknown Officer #3
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Larry Southern v. Richard H. Bishoff, PC
as 15-2008
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LARRY SOUTHERN, ROY SOUTHERN, YVONNE HARRIS and others
Plaintiff:
LUCILLE SOUTHERN, ODELL PARKER and RUTH PARKER
Defendant - Appellee:
RICHARD H. BISHOFF, PC, RICHARD H. BISHOFF, JOHN M. DEAKLE and others
Defendant:
ASBESTOS PROCESSING LLC, A. JOEL BENTLEY LAW OFFICE, CHARLES G. BLACKWELL, JR. and others
Intervenor:
WILLIAM HOWELL MORRISON
Rolph v. Warden
as 1:2015cv02499
Plaintiff:
John Michael Rolph, II
Defendant:
Warden and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROBINSON v. USA
as 1:2015cv00606
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
JOHN MICHAEL ROBINSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Lynch et al v. Dining Concepts Group LLC et al
as 2:2015cv00580
Defendant:
Dining Concepts Group LLC, Sandeep Patel, John Does 1 through 10 and others
Plaintiff:
Lynch, John Michael Jones, Brittany Whitehead and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Kiger v. Atrium Medical Corporation
as 6:2014cv04481
Plaintiff:
John Michael Kiger
Defendant:
Atrium Medical Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
