Cases 21 - 30 of 61
MADER v. POLICE OFFICER JOHN DOES 1-25 et al
as 2:2014cv06963
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY MADER
Defendant:
POLICE OFFICER JOHN DOES 1-25, POLICE OFFICER JANE DOES 1-25 and CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NEILD v. SPEISER et al
as 2:2014cv06965
Plaintiff:
EDWARD NEILD
Defendant:
JOHN SPEISER, ANTHONY PAROTTI, POLICE OFFICER JOHN DOES 1-25 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROLLINS v. LICIARDELLO et al
as 2:2014cv06836
Plaintiff:
KEITH ROLLINS
Defendant:
THOMAS LICIARDELLO, JEFFREY WALKER, BRIAN REYNOLDS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
NEWTON v. MCCLOSKY et al
as 2:2014cv06799
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH NEWTON and LUZ GARCIA
Defendant:
JOSEPH MCCLOSKY, MICHAEL SPICER, PERRY BETTS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. LICIARDELLO et al
as 2:2014cv06236
Defendant:
THOMAS LICIARDELLO, MICHAEL SPICER, JOSEPH MCCLOSKEY and others
Plaintiff:
CHIHEAN JONES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MATTEO v. LICIARDELLO et al
as 2:2014cv05829
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY MATTEO
Defendant:
THOMAS LICIARDELLO, JOHN SPEISER, MICHAEL SPICER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
JACKSON v. LICIARDELLO et al
as 2:2014cv05828
Plaintiff:
GREGORY JACKSON
Defendant:
THOMAS LICIARDELLO, MICHAEL SPICER, BRIAN REYNOLDS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
RODRIGUEZ v. LICIARDELLO et al
as 2:2014cv04862
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL A. RODRIGUEZ
Defendant:
THOMAS LICIARDELLO, BRIAN REYNOLDS, MICHAEL SPICER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BALLARD v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2014cv04740
Plaintiff:
MALIK BALLARD
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, CHARLES RAMSEY, EDWARD KEPPELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KINEE v. LICIARDELLO et al
as 2:2014cv04586
Plaintiff:
SHERRIANNE KINEE
Defendant:
THOMAS LICIARDELLO, JOHN SPEISER, PERRY BETTS and others
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.
