Cases 21 - 30 of 44,110
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv05231
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
CASTRO-MOTA v. GIBBONS, et al.
as 2:2024cv01645
Plaintiff:
SANTOS CASTRO-MOTA
Defendant:
DIANE E. GIBBONS, JOHN T. FEGLEY, JILL M. GRAZIANO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MUNOZ-SOTOMAYOR v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. (Improperly plead as The Home Depot)
as 2:2024cv05100
Plaintiff:
LUZMILA E MUNOZ-SOTOMAYOR
Defendant:
HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. (Improperly plead as The Home Depot)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
WILLIAMS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
as 1:2024cv05140
Plaintiff:
DANA E. WILLIAMS
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
ESTATE OF DELIGHT E CARLSON et al v. LLT MANAGEMENT LLC et al
as 3:2024cv05088
Defendant:
LLT MANAGEMENT LLC, LTL MANAGEMENT LLC, JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC and others
Plaintiff:
ESTATE OF DELIGHT E CARLSON and MELISSA CAMUTO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jeffrey Herrera v. Superintendent Laurel Highlands SCI, et al
as 24-1663
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY E. HERRERA
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT LAUREL HIGHLANDS SCI and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
Sandra RumanekIn re: Sandra Rumanek
as 24-1634
Petitioner:
In re: SANDRA RUMANEK and DR. OLGA A. KATZ
Respondent:
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL MANAGEMENT INC, SHERRY R. FALLON, DAVID G. CULLEY and others
WEBB v. RANGOS et al
as 2:2024cv00566
Petitioner:
DEREK LEE WEBB
Respondent:
JILL E. RANGOS, ORLANDO HARPER, ALLEGHENY COUNTY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DRIVER OPPORTUNITY PARTNERS I, L.P. v. ADAMS et al
as 3:2024cv00080
Plaintiff:
DRIVER OPPORTUNITY PARTNERS I, L.P.
Defendant:
J. MICHAEL ADAMS, JR., Richard W. Bloomingdale, AMY BRADLEY and others
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.
