Cases 31 - 40 of 441
Lavar Armstrong v. John Gretsky, et al
as 23-1765
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LAVAR ARMSTRONG
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN GRETSKY, WILLIAM MURPHY, JOHN BENOZICH and others
Calhoun v. Washington et al
as 5:2023cv10946
Plaintiff:
Samuel Eugene Calhoun
Defendant:
Heidi Washington, Sherry L. Burt, Darrell A. Steward and others
Carter v. Macy's et al
as 3:2023cv00482
Plaintiff:
Joseph Carter
Defendant:
Macy's, Ann Scanlon, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Lawton City of et al
as 5:2023cv00284
Plaintiff:
Kent Williams
Defendant:
Lawton City of, James Smith, Terry Sellers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv01280
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Need Essentials U.S.A. LLC v. Need Pty Ltd. et al
as 2:2023cv01265
Plaintiff:
Need Essentials U.S.A. LLC
Defendant:
Need Pty Ltd., NeedEssentials IP Pty Ltd., Ryan Scanlon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Breach of Contract
Johnson v. Erie County Medical Center Corporation et al
as 1:2023cv00141
Plaintiff:
Robert W. Johnson
Defendant:
Erie County Medical Center Corporation, Erie County Center Program, Officer A. Shields and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02039
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Dunn v. Tong et al
as 3:2023cv00117
Plaintiff:
David J Dunn
Defendant:
William Tong, Sean Scanlon, John Herrington and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00358
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
