Cases 31 - 40 of 42
CESSNA v. ARMSTRONG COUNTY et al
as 2:2014cv00864
Plaintiff:
TODD CESSNA
Defendant:
ARMSTRONG COUNTY, DAVID HOGUE, DAVID HARTMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
UNITED STATES et al v. BRDC et al
as 2:2014cv00176
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES and SUNRYSE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC.
Defendant:
BRDC, BURNS AND ROE SERVICES CORPORATION, DCK NORTH AMERICA, LLC. and others
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270
UNITED STATES et al v. BRDC et al
as 2:2014cv00177
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES and SUNRYSE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC.
Defendant:
BRDC, BURNS AND ROE SERVICES CORPORATION, DCK NORTH AMERICA, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270
WATTERSON et al v. ARMSTRONG COUNTY et al
as 2:2013cv01267
Plaintiff:
CLARENCE WATTERSON and MARTHA WATTERSON
Defendant:
ARMSTRONG COUNTY, DAVID HOGUE, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
EMIGH v. ARMSTRONG COUNTY et al
as 2:2013cv01266
Plaintiff:
JACKIE EMIGH
Defendant:
ARMSTRONG COUNTY , DAVID HOGUE , JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCARDLE v. HUFNAGEL et al
as 1:2012cv00326
Defendant:
DANIEL F. CUSICK, JOHN DOE, ANNE M. MCARDLE and others
Plaintiff:
PAUL J. MCARDLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROE v. NICOLETTI et al
as 2:2012cv01509
Plaintiff:
JOHN ROE
Defendant:
HARRY NICOLETTI, JR. , KEVIN FREISS, TORY KELLY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
ROE v. SENECA VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT et al
as 2:2010cv00543
Plaintiff:
JANE DOE
Defendant:
SENECA VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT, DONALD J. TYLINSKI, MARK KORCINSKY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROE et al v. PENTAGROUP FINANCIAL, LLC
as 2:2009cv00654
Plaintiff:
LISA ROE and JACK ROE
Defendant:
PENTAGROUP FINANCIAL, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
GREEN v. CITY OF MCKEESPORT et al
as 2:2008cv00898
Plaintiff:
LAKEYA GREEN
Defendant:
CITY OF MCKEESPORT, JOHN DOE and RICHARD ROE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
