Cases 41 - 50 of 51,705
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00807
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Kinsley Enterprises, Inc. et al v. Kinsley Roofing, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv00810
Plaintiff:
Kinsley Enterprises, Inc. and Kinseley Construction LLC
Defendant:
Kinsley Roofing, LLC and Nigel Correa
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1121 Trademark Infringement
Speaks v. O'Malley
as 3:2024cv00794
Plaintiff:
Sherry Lynn Speaks
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00805
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990
Stockton v. Little et al
as 1:2024cv00802
Plaintiff:
Ronald Stockton
Defendant:
George Little, John Wetzel, Thomas McGinley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williamson v. Wertz et al
as 1:2024cv00482
Plaintiff:
Bobby Kenneth Williamson
Defendant:
R. Wertz, C. Banks, R. Kyler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cicchiello v. Warden Briggs et al
as 3:2024cv00475
Petitioner:
Joan Cicchiello
Respondent:
Warden Briggs and Pennsylvania Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Cooper v. Prince et al
as 4:2024cv00487
Plaintiff:
Bruce X. Cooper
Defendant:
Scott Prince and Mark Abel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Aerotek, Inc. v. River Run Foods Inc
as 4:2024cv00804
Plaintiff:
Aerotek, Inc.
Defendant:
River Run Foods Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Badalamenti v. Meisenhelder et al
as 3:2024cv00801
Plaintiff:
Cara Badalamenti
Defendant:
Hayleigh Meisenhelder and Gary Meisenhelder
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
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.
