Cases 21 - 30 of 157
DOOLEY v. CHELTENHAM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2021cv02663
Plaintiff:
SHANE DOOLEY
Defendant:
MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, MONTGOMERY COUNTY MAGISTERIAL COURT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bonds v. Commonwealth of Virginia et al
as 7:2021cv00363
Defendant:
Sheriff Tim Allen, Roanoke City Commonwealth Attorney Office, Roanoke City Sheriff Department and others
Plaintiff:
Durwin Evant Bonds
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jidoefor v. United States of America et al
as 0:2021cv01392
Defendant:
Jonathan J Ferris, Michael Feinberg, Randall Flint and others
Plaintiff:
Okwuchukwu Emmanuel Jidoefor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv00420
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv00126
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
DOOLEY v. DASSER et al
as 2:2021cv04034
Defendant:
PAUL WALTER DASSER, PASSIC COUNTY and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10 (names being fictitious and unknown)
Plaintiff:
BARRY DOOLEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
DOOLEY v. DASHER et al
as 2:2021cv04036
Defendant:
PASSAIC COUNTY, JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10 (fictitious unidentified individuals), DR. PAUL WALTER DASHER and others
Plaintiff:
BARRY DOOLEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Nelson v. Croymans et al
as 1:2021cv01007
Defendant:
Robert W. Dooley, Tim Zempel, City of Sisseton and others
Plaintiff:
Franklin Sandoval Nelson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343
Bracy v. Jordan et al
as 4:2020cv07585
Plaintiff:
Karl Bracy
Defendant:
Corporal Fuller, Officer Brooks, DOES 1-50 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CASE OPENED IN ERROR
as 4:2020cv00618
Defendant:
Gerald Snyder, Terrance Dooley, Jr., Travis Hewitt and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
