Cases 41 - 50 of 137
EL v. CITY OF PHILA et al
as 2:2015cv04038
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL MILLER EL
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILA and CITY OF PHILA POLICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
PARKER v. HAAZ et al
as 2:2015cv03474
Plaintiff:
JASON PARKER
Defendant:
SAM HAAZ, DAVID C. SHUTER, PERRY DEMARCO, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LYNCH v. THE CITY OF PHILA. et al
as 2:2015cv03064
Plaintiff:
JOHN J. LYNCH
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILA., THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNA., THE PHILA. DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFC. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
VANGJELI v. CITY OF PHILA et al
as 2:2015cv01566
Plaintiff:
SUZANA VANGJELI
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILA, FREE LIBRARY and HR'S
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv01397
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
FRAZIER v. THE COMMONWEALTH OF PA et al
as 2:2015cv00936
Plaintiff:
MARK S. FRAZIER
Defendant:
THE COMMONWEALTH OF PA and THE CITY OF PHILA.
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
WALKER v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2014cv07384
Plaintiff:
SAMUEL WALKER
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CITY OF PHILA. PA JUDICIAL SYSTEM/COMMON PLEAS COURT OF PHILA. RECORDS DEPT. and PHILA. PRISON SYSTEM RECORDS DEPT.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DANIHEL v. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT et al
as 2:2014cv06880
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH DANIHEL
Defendant:
OFFICE OF PRESIDENT, US HUD, US SENATOR PA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BROWN-BEY v. CCP OF PHILA. CTY. et al
as 2:2014cv06162
Plaintiff:
WILLIE BROWN-BEY
Defendant:
CCP OF PHILA. CTY., U.S.A. CORPORATION, CITY OF PHILA., MUNICIPAL CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LYNCH v. THE CITY OF PHILA. et al
as 2:2014cv04414
Plaintiff:
JOHN J. LYNCH
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILA., THE PHILA TRAFFIC COURT and THE PHILA PARKING AUTHORITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
