Cases 31 - 40 of 64
United States of America v. Presher et al
as 6:2014cv06505
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Roxanne M. Presher, Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC, Midland Funding LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Doyle v. City of Corning
as 6:2014cv06507
Plaintiff:
Anne Marie Doyle
Defendant:
City of Corning
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Doyle v. City of Corning
as 1:2014cv00672
Plaintiff:
Anne Marie Doyle
Defendant:
City of Corning
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Romanick v. Corning Inc. et al
as 6:2013cv06006
Plaintiff:
Daniel A. Romanick
Defendant:
Corning Inc., Darlene Marino and Steel Workers Union Local 1000
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2012cv06704
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
United States of America v. Andrews et al
as 6:2012cv06492
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Russell L. Andrews, Dorothy A. Andrews, Tri County Housing Council and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Foreclosure
Miles v. Corning Inc. Long Term Disability Plan et al
as 6:2012cv06063
Plaintiff:
Kathy Miles
Defendant:
Corning Inc. Long Term Disability Plan and Corning, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Dow Corning Corporation et al v. BB&T Corporation et al
as 6:2012mc06005
Plaintiff:
Dow Corning Corporation and Hemlock Semiconductor Corporation
Defendant:
BB&T Corporation and Scott & Stringfellow LLC
Movant:
Mark S. Rogus
Corning Incorporated v. Detroit Diesel Corporation et al
as 6:2011cv06530
Plaintiff:
Corning Incorporated
Defendant:
Detroit Diesel Corporation and Daimler Trucks North America, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cook v. City of Corning,
as 6:2011cv06436
Plaintiff:
Gary Cook
Defendant:
City of Corning
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.
