Cases 21 - 30 of 86
H o/b/o Harry Hamilton et al v. Hamilton et al
as 3:2021cv00501
Defendant:
Amanda Ackley, Pennsylvania State University Athletics Department, JOHN DOE and others
Plaintiff:
Harry E. Hamilton and H o/b/o Harry Hamilton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv00098
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
BETANCES v. AT&T INC. et al
as 3:2020cv02239
Defendant:
AT&T Inc. doing business as AT&T STORE WILKES BARRE, GABBY NORWOOD, OLIVER PHILPOTT and others
Plaintiff:
CARLOS BETANCES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Feno v. Oliver et al
as 3:2020cv02242
Defendant:
Tyler O'Shura and Joshua Oliver
Plaintiff:
Joseph G. Feno
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BETANCES v. AT&T INC. et al
as 2:2020cv04334
Defendant:
AT&T INC. doing business as AT&T STORE WILKES BARRE, GABBY NORWOOD, OLIVER PHILPOTT and others
Plaintiff:
CARLOS BETANCES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Gomez v. Sanzi et al
as 1:2020cv01113
Defendant:
John Doe 2, Nathan V. Oliver, Gary B. Sanzi and others
Plaintiff:
Demetrio Martin Wazar Gomez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GOLDSMITH v. GOLDSMITH et al
as 2:2020cv00450
Defendant:
OFFICER BRIAN MARKUS, GOLDSMITH AND OGRODOWSKI, LLC, OLIVER K. PALLEY and others
Plaintiff:
KENNETH GOLDSMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HOWARD v. EINSTEIN HOSPITAL et al
as 2:2020cv01101
Defendant:
IMANI OLIVER, CHANNEL JONES.W, JONATHAN HOUTON and others
Plaintiff:
WINCHELLA HOWARD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
REED v. HOUTON et al
as 2:2020cv01102
Defendant:
JONATHAN HOUTON, IMANI OLIVER, MICHAEL PRATT and others
Plaintiff:
CAMERON REED
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Marte v. Oliver et al
as 3:2020cv00252
Defendant:
Officer John Doe, Officer Kyle Oliver and The Borough of Jim Thorpe
Plaintiff:
Arturo Jonas Joaquin Marte
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
