Cases 91 - 100 of 161
Lopshire v. Maricopa, County of et al
as 4:2018cv00333
Defendant:
Pima County Board of Administrator, Lisa Green, James Marner and others
Plaintiff:
Caraleen Marie Lopshire
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv01629
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Anderson v. Mesa Public Schools District et al
as 2:2018cv00692
Plaintiff:
Jenifer Anderson
Defendant:
Mesa Public Schools District , Mesa Public Schools Governing Board , Elaine Miner and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Tripati v. Corizon Incorporated et al
as 4:2018cv00066
Plaintiff:
Anant Kumar Tripati
Defendant:
Corizon Incorporated, Calvin Johnson, B Anderson Flatt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richardson v. C R Bard Incorporated et al
as 2:2017cv04531
Plaintiff:
Michelle Richardson
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated and Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Richardson v. C R Bard Incorporated et al
as 2:2017cv04267
Plaintiff:
Schwann Richardson
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated and Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cofield #046955 v. Kittredge et al
as 2:2017cv02788
Plaintiff:
Stephen W Cofield
Defendant:
Paul Kittredge, Charles L Ryan, Cathryn Squires and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hackman #136624 v. Ryan et al
as 2:2017cv01840
Plaintiff:
Daniel Weldon Hackman
Defendant:
Charles L Ryan, Richard Pratt, Subodh Shroff and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00486
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Richardson v. C R Bard Incorporated et al
as 2:2016cv04425
Plaintiff:
Michele Richardson
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated and Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
