Cases 1 - 8 of 8
LUNDY v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2023cv00807
Plaintiff:
Mr. LEE PRESTON LUNDY and LEE PRESTON LUNDY
Defendant:
POLICE OFFICER ROBERT BONDS, Commissioner DANIELLE M. OUTLAW, CITY OF PHILADELPHIA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
JANE DOE v. PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2020cv03352
Defendant:
"JANE DOE", ASSOCIATE "AGENT" (EX CONS AND CURRENT PAROLEE AKA ILLEGAL CI ASSOCIAT OF THE PARENTE FAMILY) "JOHN DOE", CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE RADIO, CAPTAIN AND RADIO DISPATCHER(S) "JANE/JOHN DOE" AND RADIO DISPATC and others
Plaintiff:
JANE DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-2115
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
PARKER v. NUTTER et al
as 2:2015cv02213
Plaintiff:
JASON PARKER
Defendant:
MICHAEL NUTTER, LOUIS GIORLA, M. FARRELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
EVANS v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2012cv04557
Plaintiff:
JAMES D. EVANS
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, GLENN J. CONWAY, P/O JOHN DOE#'S 1 TO 7 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PRATER et al v. PHILADELPHIA PARKING AUTHORITY et al
as 2:2011cv06962
Plaintiff:
CHARMAINE PRATER and (MINOR CHILD) PRATER
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA PARKING AUTHORITY, TAXI AND LEMO, OLD CITY CAB and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
FOWLER v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2011cv01341
Plaintiff:
NELSON FOWLER
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA , PHILADELPHIA POLICE COMMISSIONER CHARLES H. RAMSEY , CHARLES HENRY, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
FINNEY v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2007cv02669
Plaintiff:
NIESHA FINNEY
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, POLICE DEPARTMENT, CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE COMMISSIONER SYLVESTER M. JOHNSON, POLICE OFFICER DAVID PINKERTON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
