Cases 41 - 50 of 70
HARRELL v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. et al
as 2:2015cv06237
Plaintiff:
AMY HARRELL
Defendant:
BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., BAYER CORPORATION and DOES 1-100
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
COFFEY v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2015cv00231
Plaintiff:
JOHN COFFEY
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, RUBEN B. MORALES, M. ANGUD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRELL v. EASTWICK COLLEGE AND THE HOHOKUS SCHOOLS et al
as 2:2014cv02373
Plaintiff:
CHARLES HARRELL
Defendant:
EASTWICK COLLEGE AND THE HOHOKUS SCHOOLS and DOES 1-10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv07913
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
HARRELSON et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2013cv03983
Plaintiff:
SANDRA J. HARRELSON and HARRELL L. HARRELSON
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, ETHICON, INC and ETHICON, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
DIPPOLITO v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2013cv00175
Plaintiff:
FRANK DIPPOLITO
Defendant:
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ERIC HOLDER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRELL v. WARREN et al
as 3:2012cv01479
Petitioner:
JASON HARRELL
Respondent:
CHARLES WARREN and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HARRELL v. WARREN et al
as 3:2012cv00401
Petitioner:
JASON HARRELL
Respondent:
CHARLES WARREN and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PEREZ v. TURNER et al
as 1:2011cv06833
Plaintiff:
MIKE PEREZ
Defendant:
NICOLLETA TURNER, PATEL, JOANN HITTIE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv06477
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
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.
