Cases 11 - 20 of 24
BUNDY v. GARMAN et al
as 2:2017cv03308
Petitioner:
ERIC BUNDY
Respondent:
MARK GARMAN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv05901
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
RAMBERT et al v. GRISBY et al
as 1:2016cv00072
Plaintiff:
ERIC X. RAMBERT, ANTHONY R. JOHNSON, MICHAEL BUNDY and others
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, JOHN E. WETZEL, MICHAEL OVERMYER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bundy v. Target Corporation
as 1:2016cv00475
Plaintiff:
Charles Bundy
Defendant:
Target Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PENNSYLVANIA CONVENTION CENTER AUTHORITY v. CORYELL et al
as 2:2015cv02534
Plaintiff:
PENNSYLVANIA CONVENTION CENTER AUTHORITY
Defendant:
EDWARD CORYELL, SR., EDWARD CORYELL, JR., J. R. HOCKER and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
BUNDY v. THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY
as 2:2015cv01349
Plaintiff:
KEVIN BUNDY
Defendant:
THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
BUNDY v. OVERMYER et al
as 2:2015cv00214
Petitioner:
ANTONIO BUNDY
Respondent:
MICHAEL D. OVERMYER, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv00394
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
BUNDY v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv37296
Plaintiff:
DUANE H BUNDY
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
SARMIENTO v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST et al
as 2:2010cv30395
Plaintiff:
BUNDY C. SARMIENTO
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST, ACANDS, INC., ACORN IRON & SUPPLY CO. and others
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688 Jones Act
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.
