Cases 21 - 30 of 33
CONSIDINE v. JAGODINSKI
as 2:2013cv07263
Plaintiff:
J. MICHAEL CONSIDINE, JR.
Defendant:
JONATHAN J. JAGODINSKI
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BRUNO v. THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2013cv01357
Plaintiff:
MARK A. BRUNO
Defendant:
THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA , RONALD D. CASTILLE , THOMAS G. SAYLOR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MCHALE v. BIOMET MICROFIXATION, LLC
as 2:2013cv00609
Plaintiff:
J. MICHAEL MCHALE
Defendant:
BIOMET MICROFIXATION, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
CHASE v. O'MALLEY et al
as 2:2012cv01056
Plaintiff:
WARREN CHASE
Defendant:
MARTIN J. O'MALLEY, ANTHONY G. BROWN, SECRETARY OF STATE - JOSHUA SHAFSTERN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TRUSTGARD INSURANCE COMPANY v. JOHNSON et al
as 2:2012cv02273
Plaintiff:
TRUSTGARD INSURANCE COMPANY
Defendant:
DANIEL JAMES JOHNSON, J. MICHAEL JOHNSON, KIM JOHNSON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SMITH v. CARPENTER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION et al
as 5:2011cv02487
Plaintiff:
KELLY SMITH
Defendant:
CARPENTER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION and J. MICHAEL HOM
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 206
PRICE v. ROBERTS et al
as 2:2010cv01574
Defendant:
GEORGE ROBERTS, J. MICHAEL AARON, CHRISTOPHER J. NEAL and others
Plaintiff:
AMBER PRICE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HAAGENSEN v. SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2008cv01560
Plaintiff:
JANICE HAAGENSEN
Defendant:
SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA, RONALD D. CASTILLE, THOMAS G. SAYLOR and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
MUHAMMAD v. WEIS et al
as 2:2008cv03616
Plaintiff:
AKHI RAHEEM MUHAMMAD
Defendant:
GREGORY T. WEIS, W. ARCH IRVIN, JR., BERNARD J. MCAULEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
EVANS v. MCCONNELL et al
as 3:2008cv00097
Plaintiff:
JAMES D. EVANS
Defendant:
J. MICHAEL MCCONNELL and DAN BUTLER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
