Cases 81 - 90 of 425,997
Carty v. Pennsylvania Parole Board et al
as 1:2024cv00733
Petitioner:
Donald Charles Carty
Respondent:
Pennsylvania Parole Board and Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rockwell v. O'Malley
as 1:2024cv00714
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Rockwell
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Lisenby v. OLYMPUS CORPORATION OF THE AMERICAS et al
as 5:2024cv01803
Plaintiff:
Paul Lisenby
Defendant:
OLYMPUS CORPORATION OF THE AMERICAS, OLYMPUS AMERICA INC. and GYRUS ACMI, INC.
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv01804
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601 Truth in Lending
DAY v. OMALLEY
as 5:2024cv01807
Plaintiff:
MEGAN ALANA DAY
Defendant:
MARTIN J. OMALLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
INTERNET RESEARCH BUREAU L.L.C. v. OPTIMAL STRATEGIX GROUP, INC.
as 2:2024cv01790
Plaintiff:
INTERNET RESEARCH BUREAU L.L.C.
Defendant:
OPTIMAL STRATEGIX GROUP, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
PATEL v. ANOOPAM MISSION, INC.
as 2:2024cv01808
Plaintiff:
GARIMA PATEL
Defendant:
ANOOPAM MISSION, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
KELLEY v. NOVO NORDISK INC. et al
as 2:2024cv01793
Plaintiff:
ROBYN KELLEY
Defendant:
NOVO NORDISK INC., NOVO NORDISK US COMMERCIAL HOLDINGS, INC., NOVO NORDISK US HOLDINGS INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01798
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv01797
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
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.
