Cases 81 - 90 of 21,832
Brown v. Warner
as 2:2024cv00242
Petitioner:
Diondrae Brown
Respondent:
Jack Warner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
FuboTV Inc. et al v. The Walt Disney Company et al
as 1:2024cv01363
Plaintiff:
FuboTV Inc. and FuboTV Media Inc.
Defendant:
The Walt Disney Company, ESPN, Inc., ESPN Enterprises, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Warner v. Harry et al
as 1:2024cv00307
Plaintiff:
William T. Warner
Defendant:
Dr. Laurel Harry, Bernadette Mason, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Archaga-Reyes v. Warner
as 2:2024cv00231
Petitioner:
Christian Archaga-Reyes
Respondent:
Jack Warner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Stice et al v. The 3M Company et al
as 1:2024cv01179
Defendant:
The 3M Company, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., AGC Chemicals Americas Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Stice, Rudolph Stone, Ernest Stringer and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal - Suit against Federal Officer
Peterson v. Seibold et al
as 7:2024cv00048
Plaintiff:
John Peterson, III
Defendant:
LT. S. Seibold, Msgt. T. Warner and Sgt. A. Ligon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Donna Conner v. Xfinity
as 24-1145
Plaintiff:
DONNA MARIE CONNER
Defendant:
XFINITY, United States General, ASSURANCE WIRELESS USA-LP, JASON S. MIYARES, Commonwealth of Virginia, Attorney General and others
Kearney v. Mangrum et al
as 2:2024cv00098
Plaintiff:
Lerico Kearney
Defendant:
Mangrum and Warner
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Arleen Chen v. NYS Corporation et al
as 2:2024cv01172
Plaintiff:
Arleen Chen
Defendant:
NYS Corporation, Michael Palance, Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty
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.
