Cases 31 - 40 of 44
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv08585
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Minor v. Curley et al
as 6:2010cv01238
Plaintiff:
Dasmin L. Minor
Defendant:
Michael Curley, Howard Brodt, James Holt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
DePaul v. McNamara et al
as 6:2010cv01123
Plaintiff:
Barton DePaul
Defendant:
Scott McNamara, Mark Curley and William Walsh
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sheppard v. Curley et al
as 6:2010cv00921
Plaintiff:
Ann Sheppard
Defendant:
Michael Curley, Frank Mucitelli and City of Utica, New York
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Raimundi v. Astellas US LLC et al
as 1:2010cv05240
Plaintiff:
Pamela Curley
Defendant:
Astellas US LLC, Astellas Pharma US, Inc. and Astellas Pharma Manufacturing, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Curley et al v. Pergament
as 2:2009mc00266
Movant:
Michael Curley and Kathleen Curley
Respondent:
Marc A. Pergament
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2008cv07001
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Rosquist v. St. Marks Realty Assoc., LLC et al
as 1:2008cv02764
Plaintiff:
George Rosquist
Defendant:
St. Marks Realty Assoc., LLC, Twins Moving, Inc., City Of New York and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Curley v. Smithkline Beechman Corporation et al
as 1:2007cv07879
Plaintiff:
Frank W. Curley
Defendant:
Smithkline Beechman Corporation, Glaxosmithkline and Smithkline Beechman Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Curley v. Philo
as 1:2007cv00370
Plaintiff:
Timothy Curley
Defendant:
Virginia Philo
Counter Claimant:
Virginia Philo and Virginia Philo
Counter Defendant:
Timothy Curley and Timothy Curley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
