Cases 81 - 90 of 340
Pryor et al v. Rush-Copley Medical Center, Inc. et al
as 1:2019cv08496
Plaintiff:
Adriana Madrigal, Nathaniel Pryor, Jr., Nathaniel Pryor and others
Defendant:
Rush-Copley Medical Center, Inc., M.D. HINNA KHAN and Hinna Khan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Medical Malpractice
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv00603
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
MEDMARC CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. CAMDEN AND MERIDEW, P.C. et al
as 1:2019cv04791
Defendant:
NASSIR HABIB, SCOTT C QUICK, SHAHID HUSSAIN and others
Plaintiff:
MEDMARC CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Khan, Amir v. Lathrop, Logen et al
as 3:2019cv00979
Defendant:
Logen J. Lathrop, Kassandra M. Kimbler and Jeri L. Evans
Plaintiff:
Amir Jamel Khan
Not Classified By Court:
WSPF Prison Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Limbacher v. Dart et al
as 1:2019cv07509
Defendant:
Dr. Khan, Barbara Davis, John Doe #1 and others
Plaintiff:
Shane Edward Limbacher
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sabeehullah et al v. Fairlife LLC et al
as 1:2019cv07171
Defendant:
Sue McCloskey, Fairlife LLC and Mike McCloskey
Plaintiff:
Mohammad Sabeehullah and Nabil Khan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Tayr Al Ghashiyah (Khan) v. Brian Foster
as 19-2957
Petitioner / Appellant:
TAYR K. AL GHASHIYAH (KHAN), also known as John Casteel
Respondent / Appellee:
BRIAN FOSTER, Warden
Tayr K. Al Ghashiyah (Khan) v. Brian Foster
as 19-2922
Petitioner / Appellant:
TAYR K. AL GHASHIYAH (KHAN), also known as John Casteel
Respondent / Appellee:
BRIAN FOSTER, Warden
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2019cv06352
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1446
Tayr Al Ghashiyah (Khan) v. Brian Foster
as 19-2760
Respondent:
BRIAN FOSTER, Warden
Petitioner:
TAYR K. AL GHASHIYAH (KHAN)
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.
