Cases 71 - 80 of 101
SAMUELS v. SKRADZINSKI et al
as 1:2015cv07362
Plaintiff:
DUSTIN LAMAR SAMUELS
Defendant:
SKRADZINSKI, DEPUTY WARDEN, HEALTH DEPARTMENT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
COLEMAN v. COUNTY OF MERCER et al
as 3:2015cv06623
Plaintiff:
JAMES COLEMAN
Defendant:
COUNTY OF MERCER , CHARLES ELLIS , M. KOWNACKI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SHAMY v. SANDERS et al
as 3:2015cv06096
Plaintiff:
JAMES R. SHAMY
Defendant:
LACREASE LAMAR SANDERS, US EXPRESS INC. , ABC CORP. 1-5 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
ALFORD v. NEW JERSEY STATE PRISON et al
as 1:2015cv05640
Petitioner:
LAMAR ALFORD
Respondent:
NEW JERSEY STATE PRISON and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WILLIAMS et al v. DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. et al
as 1:2015cv04504
Plaintiff:
LAMAR WILLIAMS and LOIS WILLIAMS
Defendant:
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO U.S. HOLDINGS, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO CO., LTD. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
WITHERSPOON v. ROBINSON
as 2:2014cv06313
Defendant:
LAMAR ROBINSON
Plaintiff:
DESMOND WITHERSPOON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
ROBINSON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 3:2014cv04920
Petitioner:
LAMAR ROBINSON
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
DUBOSE v. CAMDEN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
as 1:2014cv03282
Plaintiff:
LAMAR DUBOSE
Defendant:
CAMDEN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MILBOURNE v. HASTINGS et al
as 1:2013cv04821
Petitioner:
LAMAR MILBOURNE
Respondent:
BEVERLY HASTINGS and JEFFREY S. CHIESA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davis et al v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company et al
as 3:2013cv04784
Plaintiff:
George W. Davis , Duane P. Ford , Cynthia E. Ford and others
Defendant:
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY and MCKESSON CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
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.
