Cases 31 - 40 of 44
Walker v. New Castle County et al
as 1:2015cv00674
Plaintiff:
Russell E. Walker
Defendant:
New Castle County, Frank Walsh, Chris Yasik and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Thomas Gordon v. Mazda Motor Corp, et al
as 14-1279
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS GORDON, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated
Defendant - Appellee:
MAZDA MOTOR CORP and MAZDA NORTH AMERICAN OPERATIONS
GORDON v. MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION et al
as 1:2013cv03142
Plaintiff:
THOMAS GORDON
Defendant:
MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION, MAZDA NORTH AMERICAN OPERATIONS and JOHN DOE(S) 1-100
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract
Thorp #495722 v. Michigan Parole Board et al
as 1:2012cv01060
Plaintiff:
Thomas Gordon Thorp #495722
Defendant:
Michigan Parole Board, Tom Combs, Amy Bonito and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gordon v. Scarborough et al
as 1:2012cv01057
Plaintiff:
Thomas Gordon
Defendant:
James Scarborough, Perry Phelps, Pierce and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gordon v. Gill et al
as 1:2011cv01029
Plaintiff:
Thomas Gordon
Defendant:
George Gill, Michael Deppe and James Scarborough
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gordon v. Trader et al
as 1:2010cv00827
Plaintiff:
Thomas Gordon
Defendant:
Michael S. Trader, John Doe 1, John Doe 2 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shankaras v. Danberg et al
as 1:2010cv00829
Defendant:
Carl Danberg, Thomas Carroll, Rick Kearney and others
Plaintiff:
Thomas Gordon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dickens et al v. Danberg et al
as 1:2010cv00786
Plaintiff:
Kevin L. Dickens, Roman Shankaras and Thomas Gordon
Defendant:
Carl Danberg, Thomas Carroll, Rick Kearney and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gordon v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 3:2010cv00124
Plaintiff:
Thomas Gordon
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
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.
