Cases 41 - 50 of 120
McGlynn v. Weinstein
as 19-260
Defendant / Appellee:
Phillip Stone, Mitls, Attorney assigned at Bellvue Hospital, Judge Orlando Marrazzo, Jr. and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Kevin McGlynn
Cipolla-Dennis v. County of Tompkins et al
as 3:2018cv01241
Defendant:
Michael Lane, Martha Robertson, County of Tompkins and others
Plaintiff:
Joanne Cipolla-Dennis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
DENNIS, SR et al v. MERCK CO., INC. et al
as 2:2018cv20106
Plaintiff:
DARLENE DENNIS and JAMES DENNIS, SR.
Defendant:
MERCK CO., INC. and MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
DENNIS, SR et al v. MERCK CO., INC. et al
as 3:2018cv13767
Plaintiff:
Darlene Dennis, James Dennis, Sr and JAMES DENNIS, SR.
Defendant:
MERCK CO., INC. and MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
McGlynn v. Weintsien et al
as 1:2018cv08068
Defendant:
Judge Gregory Carro, Silver, Dr. Paranal and others
Plaintiff:
Kevin M. McGlynn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McGlynn v. Weinstein et al
as 1:2018cv07280
Defendant:
Judge Gregory Carro, Judge Robert A. Onofry, APA Karen Edelman-Feyes and others
Plaintiff:
Kevin McGlynn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DENNIS v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2018cv02689
Plaintiff:
JAMES DENNIS
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, FRANK JASTRZEMBSKI, MANUEL SANTIAGO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
USA v. James Lenihan, III
as 17-35968
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
JAMES DENNIS LENIHAN III
DENNIS v. CITY OF CHESTER et al
as 2:2017cv05101
Plaintiff:
JAMES DENNIS
Defendant:
CITY OF CHESTER, GERMAN SABILLON, KYLE BATTINIERI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
PARKER v. DONOWAY et al
as 1:2017cv00252
Plaintiff:
LENORRIS PARKER
Defendant:
JOSHUA DONOWAY, ERIC SIMPSON, JAMES DENNIS and others
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.
