Cases 1 - 10 of 53
v. DONATE et al
as 5:2023cv01876
Defendant:
JANINE DONATE, KYLE RUSSELL, STEVEN MILLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JACKSON v. DONATE et al
as 5:2023cv01877
Plaintiff:
SARAH JACKSON
Defendant:
LEHIGH COUNTY, JANINE DONATE, KYLE RUSSELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BARLOW, JR. v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY
as 2:2023cv00538
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY BARLOW, JR.
Defendant:
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
GOEATED LTD v. BARLOW et al
as 2:2022cv04903
Plaintiff:
GOEATED LTD
Defendant:
CURTIS EDWARD BARLOW, JR and 484 ENTERTAINMENT LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
SWAINSON v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2022cv02163
Plaintiff:
ANDREW SWAINSON
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, OFFICER MANUEL SANTIAGO, OFFICER MICHAEL COHEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BARLOW-AHSAN v. SAUL
as 2:2021cv02220
Defendant:
ANDREW M. SAUL
Plaintiff:
MICHELLE BARLOW-AHSAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
BARLOW v. AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P.
as 2:2021cv00776
Plaintiff:
JOANNE BARLOW
Defendant:
AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv06574
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
SAULTZ v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL. JOSH SHAPIRO ATTORNEY GENERAL et al
as 5:2019cv05778
Defendant:
ATTORNEY GENERAL JOSH SHAPIRO, OFFICER DAWN HEUSER, BADGE #439, SPECIAL AGENT ERIC J. BARLOW and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT ANDREW SAULTZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROBBINS v. BARLOW et al
as 5:2019cv01956
Plaintiff:
DARLENE ROBBINS
Defendant:
JEREMY R. BARLOW and PROGRESSIVE PIPELINE MANAGEMENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
