Cases 21 - 30 of 30
Sokol v. Scott et al
as 1:2015cv01188
Plaintiff:
Thomas Sokol
Defendant:
Tim Scott and Stephen Margeson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BARCLAY v. SOKOL et al
as 2:2015cv00253
Plaintiff:
VIRGIL BARCLAY
Defendant:
KAREN SOKOL and SILBAUGH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SOKOL v. SI ACQUISITION, LLC et al
as 2:2014cv05615
Plaintiff:
BARRY H. SOKOL
Defendant:
SI ACQUISITION, LLC , SORBEE INTERNATIONAL, LLC and DANIEL WERTHER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
SOKOL v. AMERICAN MODERN SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY
as 2:2014cv00945
Plaintiff:
THEODORE SOKOL
Defendant:
AMERICAN MODERN SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GREENE v. SOKOL
as 2:2013cv00249
Plaintiff:
VICTORIA GREENE
Defendant:
ELAM SOKOL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Housing Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv01516
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
SOKOL et al v. HEADMEN MINES, ITD. et al
as 2:2010cv64532
Plaintiff:
DONALD J. SOKOL and EDNA G. SOKOL
Defendant:
HEADMEN MINES, ITD. , ASBESTOS CORPORATION, LTD. , VERMONT ASBESTOS GROUP, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CALDWELL v. FOLINO et al
as 2:2008cv00122
Plaintiff:
CLAY CALDWELL
Defendant:
LOUIS FOLINO, M. A. PRICE, SGT. GAGNON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
SOKOL v. NATIONAL GYPSUM COMPANY et al
as 2:2007cv62009
Plaintiff:
ANNA SOKOL, ANNA SOKOL and ANNA SOKOL
Defendant:
NATIONAL GYPSUM COMPANY, NATIONAL GYPSUM COMPANY, UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
SOKOL v. NATIONAL GYPSUM COMPANY et al
as 2:2007cv62143
Plaintiff:
ANNA SOKOL, ANNA SOKOL and ANNA SOKOL
Defendant:
NATIONAL GYPSUM COMPANY, UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY, FLINTKOTE COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
