Cases 81 - 90 of 1,356
LABONTE v. HARRIS et al
as 2:2023cv00411
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM LABONTE
Defendant:
SCOTT S HARRIS and LISA NESBITT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HARDISON v. RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES
as 2:2023cv00485
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM HARDISON
Defendant:
RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
LABONTE v. COLVILLE
as 2:2023cv00510
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM LABONTE
Defendant:
ROBERT J. COLVILLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
TATE v. THORNBURY TOWNSHIP
as 2:2023cv00963
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM TATE
Defendant:
THORNBURY TOWNSHIP
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Waldron v. United States of America
as 2:2023cv00452
Petitioner:
William Waldron
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 92
CUNNINGHAM v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT et al
as 2:2023cv00534
Plaintiff:
BENJAMIN CUNNINGHAM
Defendant:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, WILLIAM BELTRAN, KAROLE A. BARKER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
THORNTON v. BEAVER COUNTY DETECTIVES OFFICE et al
as 2:2023cv00198
Plaintiff:
KENNETH E. THORNTON
Defendant:
BEAVER COUNTY DETECTIVES OFFICE, BEAVER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, BEAVER COUNTY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
LABONTE v. DEJOY
as 2:2023cv00184
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM LABONTE
Defendant:
LOUIS DEJOY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McCullough v. Clinton County et al
as 4:2023cv00171
Plaintiff:
Darla McCullough
Defendant:
Clinton County, Wellpath, LLC, Jeremy Shank and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McLean, Jr. v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service
as 1:2023cv00127
Plaintiff:
William S McLean, Jr.
Defendant:
Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
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.
