Cases 1 - 10 of 21
Thomas v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2023cv01207
Plaintiff:
Lillian C. Thomas
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
Thomas v. Jiffy Lube International, Inc. et. al.
as 2:2021cv02607
Defendant:
Team Car Care East, LLC and Jiffy Lube International, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Everett C Thomas and Everett C. Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Shenk v. NantKwest, Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv00871
Defendant:
NantKwest, Inc., Cheryl Cohen, Patrick Soon-Shiong and others
Plaintiff:
Anthony Shenk
Leaman v. NantKwest, Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv01351
Defendant:
NantKwest, Inc., Cheryl Cohen, Patrick Soon-Shiong and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher Leaman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 sv
U.P. et al v. Uniondale Union Free School District et al
as 2:2020cv05256
Defendant:
UNIONDALE HIGH SCHOOL, DR JACK ABRAMOWITZ, William K. Lloyd and others
Plaintiff:
TANICKA SMITH, U P and U.P.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Tarrant v. City of Mount Vernon et al
as 7:2020cv09004
Defendant:
City of Mount Vernon, Detective Camilo Antonini, County Of Westchester and others
Plaintiff:
Gordon Michael Tarrant and Gordon Tarrant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2020cv01329
Plaintiff:
Lillian C. Thomas
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Thomas v. Dubois et al
as 7:2019cv07533
Plaintiff:
Arthur C. Thomas
Defendant:
Carl E. DuBois
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Bell
as 9:2018cv00706
Petitioner:
Gavin C. Thomas and Gavin Thomas
Respondent:
Earl Bell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thomas v. Bell
as 9:2018cv00500
Petitioner:
Gavin C. Thomas
Respondent:
Earl Bell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
