Cases 1 - 10 of 4,415
MARTIN v. BRIDGES et al
as 1:2024cv00793
Plaintiff:
MARK L. MARTIN, II
Defendant:
CLARENCE BRIDGES, MICHAEL CECIL, BRENDA FELIX and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Deafueh Monbo, et al v. Upper Chesapeake Medical Center, Inc., et al
as 24-7070
Plaintiff:
Deafueh Monbo and Juahdi Monbo
Defendant:
Upper Chesapeake Medical Center, Inc., Harford Memorial Hospital, Inc., Eskinder Afework, individually and as an employee of Upper Chesapeake Medical Center Inc. and others
Manning v. Shock et al
as 4:2024cv00406
Plaintiff:
Shaleen Cecile Manning
Defendant:
Andy Shock and Lona McCastlain
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv03433
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Other:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Jones v. Indivior Inc. et al.
as 1:2024sf65349
Plaintiff:
Cecil Jones
Defendant:
Indivior Inc., Indivior PLC, Indivior Solutions Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
Lillian Graham v. City of Philadelphia, et al
as 24-1707
Plaintiff:
LILLIAN GRAHAM
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS, PHILA POLICE DEPT 39TH DISTRICT and others
USA v. Casel
as 24-10360
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Cecil Charles Casel, also known as CC
Powell v. Ohana Military Communities, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv00184
Plaintiff:
Cleophas Cecil Powell
Defendant:
Ohana Military Communities, LLC and Hunt MH Property Management, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
RINKER v. ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC. et al
as 1:2024cv00700
Plaintiff:
ADONIS ROBERT RINKER
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC., MICHAEL CECIL, BRIDGEMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Funches v. United States et al
as 1:2024cv00527
Plaintiff:
Cecil Funches
Defendant:
USA, Lt Renae, J Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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.
