Cases 31 - 40 of 75
HENLEY v. ARAMARK CORP. et al
as 1:2015cv00227
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORP. and CORIZON MEDICAL CORP.
Plaintiff:
JAMES HENLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Moraga v. Solano County, et al.
as 2:2014cv01855
Plaintiff:
Anthony Moraga
Defendant:
Solano County and Aramark Corp.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HILL v. PHILADELPHIA INDUSTRIAL CORRECTIONAL CENTER et al
as 2:2014cv03135
Plaintiff:
TYRESE HILL
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA INDUSTRIAL CORRECTIONAL CENTER and ARAMARK CORP.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PURVIS v. ARAMARK CORP. et al
as 2:2014cv00055
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORP., BEDWELL, BOCK and others
Plaintiff:
WILLIARD PURVIS
Miscellaneou:
WVCF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
NEELY v. ARAMARK CORP. et al
as 3:2014cv01030
Plaintiff:
KATHLEEN NEELY
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORP. , ANGEL SMITH, JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10 and others
Cross_claimant:
ARAMARK CORP.
Cross_defendant:
ABC COMPANIES, JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10 and ANGEL SMITH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Bilynsky v. Prummell et al
as 2:2013cv00789
Plaintiff:
Christopher N. Bilynsky
Defendant:
Bill Prummell, Mark Caro, Captain Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilbur v. Aramark Corp. et al
as 4:2013cv10151
Plaintiff:
Brian A.K. Wilbur
Defendant:
Aramark Corp. and Aramark Correctional Services LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv23324
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv04919
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Kuzina v. Aramark Corp
as 3:2013cv00499
Plaintiff:
Theo Kuzina
Defendant:
Aramark Corp
Intervenor_plaintiff:
Middlesex Health Care
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
