Cases 1 - 10 of 69
WU v. BARASCH et al
as 2:2024cv01202
Plaintiff:
WEIDING WU
Defendant:
RICHARD BARASCH, LUKE MCGEE, STEPHEN P. GRIGGS and others
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA v. BRADLEY et al
as 2:2024cv00269
Plaintiff:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
Defendant:
AISHA ASHA BRADLEY, SUMMIT PARK EAST, GP, UNIVERSITY CITY HOUSING CO and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
ALLEGHENY COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM, v. ADAPTHEALTH CORP. et al
as 2:2023cv04104
Plaintiff:
ALLEGHENY COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM,
Defendant:
ADAPTHEALTH CORP., LUKE MCGEE, Joshua Parnes and others
BAER v. SHIFT4 PAYMENTS, INC. et al
as 5:2023cv03969
Plaintiff:
ROBERT BAER
Defendant:
SHIFT4 PAYMENTS, INC., JARED ISAACMAN, NANCY DISMAN and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv03293
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
O'MEARA v. SHIFT4 PAYMENTS, INC. et al
as 5:2023cv03206
Plaintiff:
ALFRED O'MEARA and ROBERT BAER
Defendant:
SHIFT4 PAYMENTS, INC., JARED ISAACMAN, NANCY DISMAN and others
DRIVER OPPORTUNITY PARTNERS I, LP v. ADAMS et al
as 3:2023cv00056
Plaintiff:
DRIVER OPPORTUNITY PARTNERS I, LP
Defendant:
J. MICHAEL ADAMS, JR., AMY BRADLEY, ALLAN R. DENNISON and others
FUGOK et al v. TIKTOK INC. et al
as 2:2023cv00779
Defendant:
TIKTOK INC., MUSICALLY, INC and BYTEDANCE, INC.
Plaintiff:
BRADLEY FUGOK and ADAM K STOREY
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2511 Wiretapping
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv04147
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Boldrini et al v. Giovannini et al
as 3:2022cv00300
Plaintiff:
Antonello Boldrini, Michael J. Pega, Jr. and Daniele A. Boldrini
Defendant:
Joseph P. Giovannini, Mary Pamela Amos, Marianne Cameli and others
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.
