Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Michael Pendleton v. City of Pittsburgh, et al
as 23-1040
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL J. PENDLETON
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF PITTSBURGH, DETECTIVE OVERHOLT, as the Police Officer for the City of Pittsburgh, JANET R. NECESSARY, Assistant District Attorney for the Allegheny County District Attorney's Office and others
PENDLETON v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH et al
as 2:2022cv01312
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL J. PENDLETON
Defendant:
CITY OF PITTSBURGH, DETECTIVE Y. OVERHOLT, JANET R. NECESSARY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal
THOMPSON v. DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE et al
as 2:2021cv01252
Plaintiff:
LYNNE L. THOMPSON
Defendant:
ALLEGHENY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE, STEVEN ZAPPALA, RICHARD BYERS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GALLO v. THE CITY OF EAST PITTSBURGH PA et al
as 2:2018cv01016
Defendant:
THE CITY OF EAST PITTSBURGH PA, CHIEF OF POLICE LORI FRUNCEK, MICHAEL ROSFELD and others
Plaintiff:
MICHELLE KENNEY, ANTWON ROSE, SR. and HON. RICHARD C. GALLO
Petitioner:
ALLEGHENY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv01122
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
BROCK v. ALLEGHENY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE
as 2:2012cv00914
Plaintiff:
PHILLIP H. BROCK
Defendant:
ALLEGHENY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
MATHENY v. COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2009cv01070
Plaintiff:
ELIJAH DAVID MATHENY
Defendant:
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY PENNSYLVANIA, ALLEGHENY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, NICHOLAS MOLLO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
PLUMMER et al v. SIMON et al
as 2:2008cv01744
Plaintiff:
DAVID A. PLUMMER, SR. and PLUMMER JOANNE
Defendant:
RICHARD J. SIMON, DREW LEY, WILLIAM BAUER and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
