Cases 61 - 70 of 138
Susanna Cohen-Feris et al v. McKesson Corporation et al
as 2:2015cv00096
Plaintiff:
Susanna Cohen-Feris , Sally Antone , Randi Andrews and others
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation , Eli Lilly and Company , Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Johnson et al v. Love et al
as 0:2015cv00036
Plaintiff:
Conechia Johnson and Danny Johnson
Defendant:
Thomas Robert Love, Our Lady of Bellefonte Hospital, Inc., , Johnson & Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Reece v. West Chester Hospital, LLC et al
as 2:2015cv00070
Plaintiff:
Danny Reece
Defendant:
West Chester Hospital, LLC , UC Health, LLC , Center for Advanced Spine Technologies, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Williams vs Doe
as 2:2015cv00051
Plaintiff:
Danny Williams
Defendant:
John or Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Summitt Behavior Center
as 2:2015cv00043
Plaintiff:
Danny Williams
Defendant:
Summitt Behavior Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Summitt Behavior
as 2:2015cv00044
Plaintiff:
Danny Joseph Williams
Defendant:
Summitt Behavior
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lawson v. Clark et al
as 6:2015cv00033
Plaintiff:
James D. Lawson
Defendant:
Danny Clark, Leslie Co. Detention Center and Ky. Dept. of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
United States of America v. Elam et al
as 0:2014cv00183
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Charles F. Elam, Unknown Spouse of Charles F. Elam , Danny R. Elam and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Lumpkins v. Sepanek
as 7:2014cv00159
Petitioner:
Danny Lumpkins
Respondent:
Michael Sepanek
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Howell v. Reams et al
as 6:2014cv00206
Plaintiff:
Danny C. Howell
Defendant:
Mrs. Reams, Mrs. Baker and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
