Cases 31 - 40 of 277
CONNORS v. DOE 1 et al
as 2:2021cv01511
Plaintiff:
JOHN CONNORS
Defendant:
OFFICER JOHN DOE 1, OFFICER JOHN DOE 2, OFFICER JOHN DOE 3 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WALKER v. OFFICER DAVIS et al
as 2:2021cv01096
Plaintiff:
ERIC WALKER
Defendant:
OFFICER DAVIS, OFFICER JOHN DOE and CITY OF PITTSBURGH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SIMONDS et al v. BOYER et al
as 2:2021cv00841
Defendant:
CHRISTINE BOYER, FRANCESCO ROSATO, ELIZABETH MERKEL and others
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW SIMONDS and MARSHA SIMONDS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DOE v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH et al
as 2:2021cv00111
Defendant:
WENDELL HISSRICH, STEPHEN VINANSKY, CITY OF PITTSBURGH and others
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LATTA v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH et al
as 2:2021cv00038
Defendant:
THOMAS GAULT, JOHN DOE #4, JOHN DOE #1 and others
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY LATTA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ZUBIK et al v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH et al
as 2:2020cv01809
Plaintiff:
ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH, DAVID A. ZUBIK and SAINT MARY OF THE MOUNT PARISH
Defendant:
CITY OF PITTSBURGH and SARAH QUINN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
PINKSTON v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH et al
as 2:2020cv01435
Plaintiff:
DESIREE PINKSTON
Defendant:
CITY OF PITTSBURGH, JOHN DOE, OFFICER MORGAN J. LOGAN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
VASALECH v. LIPPERT et al
as 2:2020cv01252
Defendant:
POLICE OFFICER JOSEPH LIPPERT and CITY OF PITTSBURGH
Plaintiff:
DANNY VASALECH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BANKS v. PITTSBURGH POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2020cv00856
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK BANKS
Defendant:
CITY OF PITTSBURGH, RICHARD PADUDO, CHIEF, PITTSBURGH BUREAU OF POLICE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
KOPY et al v. MARTIN et al
as 2:2020cv00558
Defendant:
DAVID LINCOLN, JOHN DOE, BRIAN BURGUNDER and others
Plaintiff:
STEPHEN R. KOPY and KOPY'S LIMITED
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.
