Cases 51 - 60 of 4,017
USA v. Bell
as 24-10090
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Roderick Wayne Bell
Sammy Belle v. , et alIn re: Sammy Belle v. , et al
as 24-1125
Petitioner:
In re: SAMMY D. BELLE
Respondent:
KEVIN RANSOM, DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
La Belle Maison v. AmRisc
as 23-30864
Plaintiff / Appellant:
La Belle Maison Associates, L.L.C., Bou MIkael Enterprises Incorporated, Sami Bou-Mikael and others
Defendant / Appellee:
AmRisc, L.P., Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, severally subscribing to Certificate Number AMR-38859-07, Indian Harbor Insurance Company and others
CA Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. Pacific Bell Telephone Co.
as 2:2024mc00004
Plaintiff:
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
Defendant:
Pacific Bell Telephone Company
Not Yet Classified:
Environmental Defense Fund
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Lynch v. Matterport, Inc, et al.
as 24-188
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SHAWN LYNCH
Defendant / Appellee:
MATTERPORT, INC, RJ PITTMAN, DAVE GAUSEBECK and others
United States v. Bell
as 24-5003
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
MICHAEL DEWAYNE BELL
CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE v. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
as 1:2023mc00125
Petitioner:
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND, INC.
Plaintiff:
CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE
Defendant:
PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. Pacific Bell Telephone Company
as 2:2023cv03030
Plaintiff:
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
Defendant:
Pacific Bell Telephone Company
Not Classified By Court:
Environmental Defense Fund
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Pacific Bell Telephone Company v. Jones
as 2:2023mc00425
Petitioner:
Pacific Bell Telephone Company
Respondent:
Seth Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
