Cases 1 - 10 of 49
Harold Berk v. Wilson Choy, et al
as 23-1620
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HAROLD R. BERK
Defendant / Appellee:
WILSON C. CHOY, MD, BEEBE MEDICAL CENTER INC and ENCOMPASS HEALTH REHABILITATION HOSPITAL OF MIDDLETOWN LLC
Harold Berk v. Wilson Choy, et al
as 23-1436
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HAROLD R. BERK
Defendant / Appellee:
WILSON C. CHOY, MD, BEEBE MEDICAL CENTER INC and ENCOMPASS HEALTH REHABILITATION HOSPITAL OF MIDDLETOWN LLC
Berk v. Choy, M.D. et al
as 1:2022cv01506
Plaintiff:
Harold R. Berk and Harold R Berk
Defendant:
Wilson C. Choy, M.D. and Beebe Medical Center
Cross Defendant:
Encompass Health Rehab
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Medical Malpractice
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00625
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
BEEBE v. ARMEL et al
as 1:2022cv00130
Petitioner:
THOMAS EUGENE BEEBE, II
Respondent:
ERIC ARMEL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR ERIE COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
USA v. Eugene Seabrookes
as 21-3208
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
EUGENE SEABROOKES, a/k/a HABEEB a/k/a BEEB
Dr. Abraham Scheer, M.D. v. Beebe Healthcare et al
as 1:2021cv01565
Plaintiff:
Dr. Abraham Scheer, M.D.
Defendant:
Beebe Healthcare, Beebe Medical Group, Mary Francis Suter and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01443
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
HOPKINS v. KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN et al
as 2:2021cv03528
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW HOPKINS
Defendant:
KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN, LYDIA I BEEBE, LU M CORDOVA and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22
Coffman v. Kansas City Southern et al
as 1:2021cv01145
Plaintiff:
Catherine Coffman
Defendant:
Kansas City Southern, Lydia I. Beebe, Lu M. Cordova 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.
