Cases 1 - 10 of 21
JOHNSON v. PROSPECT MEDICA HOLDINGS et al
as 2:2024cv00494
Plaintiff:
THEMA JOHNSON
Defendant:
PROSPECT MEDICA HOLDINGS, SAMUEL SANG-BUM LEE, JIM BROWN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Antonio Hudson v. Arthur Tarnow, et al
as 23-1016
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANTONIO HUDSON
Defendant / Appellee:
HONORABLE ARTHUR J TARNOW, HONORABLE BERNARD FREIDMAN, HONORABLE PAUL J. KOMIVES and others
VANLOAN v. THE NATION OF ISLAM et al
as 2:2021cv05536
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN VANLOAN
Defendant:
THE NATION OF ISLAM, LOUIS FARRAKHAN, TONY MUHAMMAD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jonathan VanLoan v. Nation of Islam, et al
as 21-55317
Defendant / Appellee:
BRIAN MCGEE, KENNETH SEMKO, GEOFF RIZZZO and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JONATHAN AMBROSE VANLOAN
Defendant / Appellant:
SCOTT BIXBY
Jonathan VanLoan et al v. The Nation of Islam et al
as 2:2020cv00127
Defendant:
Samuel Lee, Steve Soboroff, Gleam Davis and others
Plaintiff:
Jonathan VanLoan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Woodards v. Leonard Green & Partners
as 1:2019cv00255
Plaintiff:
Tre Von A Woodards
Defendant:
Leonard Green & Partners
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jonathan VanLoan v. The Nation of Islam et al
as 2:2019cv00197
Defendant:
Samuel Lee, Gleam Davis, Aurelio Mattucci and others
Plaintiff:
Jonathan VanLoan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sommer v. Aspen Dental Management, Inc. et al
as 1:2016cv03027
Defendant:
ADMI Corporation, ADMI Holdings L.P., Aspen Dental Management, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Samuel Sommer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016at00246
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv00450
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
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.
