Cases 151 - 160 of 193
Ascencio v. Shane et al
as 4:2011cv00494
Plaintiff:
Wallace McDonald Ascencio
Defendant:
Jillian Shane, William H. Fain and S.I.S. Officer Conroy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bolling et al v. Abernathy et al
as 1:2011cv00078
Plaintiff:
Donald B Bolling , Christopher Archiable , Kevin Broxterman and others
Defendant:
Nick Abernathy, Joshua Querry, Timothy Hardy and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185
Falzone v. Licastro et al
as 1:2010cv02918
Plaintiff:
Paul E. Falzone
Defendant:
John M. Licastro, Dennis Sweet, Christopher McDonald and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wickens et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al
as 1:2010dp20019
Plaintiff:
Mary Wickens , John Cox , Sandra Cox and others
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson and Depuy Orthopaedics
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
United States of America v. Cuyahoga County Board of Elections et al
as 1:2010cv01949
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Cuyahoga County Board of Elections, Jeffrey P. Hastings, Inajo Davis Chappell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
McDonald et al v. J.P.Morgan Chase Bank NA
as 1:2010cv00475
Plaintiff:
paul McDonald and Lana McDonald
Defendant:
J.P.Morgan Chase Bank NA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Brown v. Parrish et al
as 2:2010cv00352
Plaintiff:
Frank C Brown, Jr.
Defendant:
Russ Parrish, Deb Timmerman-Cooper, Stanley Taylor and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Ascencio v. Toss et al
as 4:2010cv00849
Plaintiff:
Wallace McDonald Ascencio
Defendant:
Toss, Jillian Shane and Roddie Rushing
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv00047
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
McDonald v. Welch
as 3:2010cv00016
Petitioner:
John L McDonald
Respondent:
Robert Welch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
