Cases 41 - 50 of 61
BRITTINGHAM v. RUSSELL et al
as 2:2010cv01204
Plaintiff:
DENISE BRITTINGHAM
Defendant:
ETHICON WILLIAMSON RUSSELL, WATSON BRITTINGHAM, SOCIAL SECURITIES BENEFITS ESTATE and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185 Labor/Mgt. Relations (Contracts)
BRITTINGHAM et al v. U.S. DEPT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et al
as 2:2009cv05352
Plaintiff:
DENISE LOUISE BRITTINGHAM, WYNDHAM VACATION OWNERSHIP, INC, BOMA DISNEY FY07H-1 B EMPLOYERS and others
Defendant:
U.S. DEPT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, KATHLEEN SEBLIUS, OFFICE OF GOV. CAPITOL and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
BRITTINGHAM v. LOCKSMITH et al
as 2:2009cv04863
Plaintiff:
DENISE BRITTINGHAM
Defendant:
LOCKSMITH, UNITED STATE POSTAL SERVICE, AMTRAK and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185 Labor/Mgt. Relations (Contracts)
BRITTINGHAM v. BLOOMINGTON IN IRA et al
as 2:2009cv04793
Plaintiff:
DENISE L. BRITTINGHAM
Defendant:
BLOOMINGTON IN IRA, IRS, PAYCHEX and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
v. USA/IRS
as 1:2009mc00273
Plaintiff:
USA/IRS
Defendant:
Package addressed to Tony Bloom, MDES, 108 Church Street, Glenn Rock, PA
USA/IRS v. Residence of Tony Bloom
as 1:2009mc00267
Plaintiff:
USA/IRS
Defendant:
Residence of Tony Bloom
USA/IRS v. 2006 Triple E Model 35 Commander Motorhome
as 1:2009mc00268
Plaintiff:
USA/IRS
Defendant:
2006 Triple E Model 35 Commander Motorhome
USA/IRS v. Residence of Tony Bloom, 110 Church Street, Glen Rock, PA
as 1:2009mc00269
Plaintiff:
USA/IRS
Defendant:
Residence of Tony Bloom, 110 Church Street, Glen Rock, PA
USA/IRS v. 2008 Harley David son Motorcycle, VIN # 1HD1PR8158Y954661
as 1:2009mc00270
Plaintiff:
USA/IRS
Defendant:
2008 Harley David son Motorcycle, VIN # 1HD1PR8158Y954661
USA/IRS v. 2008 Harley Davidson Motorcycle VIN: 1HD1JA5108Y021807
as 1:2009mc00266
Plaintiff:
USA/IRS
Defendant:
2008 Harley Davidson Motorcycle VIN: 1HD1JA5108Y021807
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.
