Cases 31 - 40 of 362
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00763
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
RICKER v. ESTOCK et al
as 3:2023cv00279
Petitioner:
David Edward Ricker
Respondent:
L. J. Estock, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and District Attorney (of) Dauphin County
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cavalieri v. Boyers et al
as 7:2023cv00092
Plaintiff:
David Edward Cavalieri
Defendant:
Ms. C. Shanks, A. David Robinson, Stacy Meinhard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MENTIER v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv03555
Plaintiff:
DAVID EDWARD MENTIER
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
O'Connor v. State of Texas
as 23-50078
Plaintiff / Appellant:
David Edward O'Connor
Defendant / Appellee:
State of Texas, Jan Soifer, Karin Crump and others
Ray et al v. 3M Company et al
as 2:2023cv00402
Plaintiff:
Marcus Dewayne Scott, James Edward Ray, Timothy William Palivoda and others
Defendant:
Du Pont De Nemours Inc, UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation Inc, 3M Company and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal-Personal Injury
David Cavalieri v. Commonwealth of Virginia
as 23-6072
Petitioner / Appellant:
DAVID EDWARD CAVALIERI
Respondent / Appellee:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
WHITMER v 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv01148
Plaintiff:
DAVID EDWARD WHITMER
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
De Vere v. USA
as 1:2023cv00112
Petitioner:
David Edward De Vere
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
RICKER v. ESTOCK et al
as 2:2023cv00084
Petitioner:
DAVID EDWARD RICKER
Respondent:
L. J. ESTOCK, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF DAUPHIN COUNTY
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.
