Cases 51 - 60 of 511
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv03773
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01303
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
OPRIS et al v. SINCERA REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE
as 2:2021cv03072
Defendant:
SINCERA REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE, AND OPERATING AS ABINGTON REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE, P.C., SINCERA REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE FORMERLY KNOWN AS AND OPERATING AS ABINGTON REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE, P.C. also known as REGIONAL WOMENS HEALTH GROUP, LLC d/b/a SINCERA REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE and others
Plaintiff:
SIMONA OPRIS, ADRIAN ADAM and BRITNEY RICHARDSON
CICCOTELLI v. VEREIT, INC. et al
as 2:2021cv02983
Defendant:
REALTY INCOME CORPORATION, EUGENE A PINOVER, RICHARD LIEB and others
Plaintiff:
ALEX CICCOTELLI
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22
Richardson v. SOLICITOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PA et al
as 2:2021cv01347
Defendant:
OFFICERS JOHN AND JANE DOE, SOLICITOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PA, WEST NORRITOWN TOWNSHIP and others
Plaintiff:
Evan Richardson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
RICHARDSON v. SAUL
as 2:2021cv01359
Defendant:
ANDREW M. SAUL and COMMISSIONER ANDREW M. SAUL
Plaintiff:
KEMEIKA R RICHARDSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
RICHARDSON v. SAUL
as 2:2021cv00887
Defendant:
Comm'r of Soc. ANDREW M. SAUL and ANDREW M. SAUL
Plaintiff:
BARBARA RICHARDSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv06529
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv06161
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1255
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv05785
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0555 b
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.
