Cases 1 - 10 of 52
SHUNMUGAM v. CITY OF BETHLEHEM et al
as 5:2026cv02239
Plaintiff:
KALAVATHI SHUNMUGAM
Defendant:
CITY OF BETHLEHEM and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF BETHLEHEM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
SHUNMUGAM v. CITY OF BETHLEHEM et al
as 2:2026cv02239
Plaintiff:
KALAVATHI SHUNMUGAM
Defendant:
CITY OF BETHLEHEM and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF BETHLEHEM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 26-1738
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
CALDERON v. BETHLEHEM et al
as 5:2026cv01049
Plaintiff:
STEVEN P CALDERON
Defendant:
CITY OF BETHLEHEM, OFFICER THOMAS W BOWDEN and OFFICER JOHN DOE #1
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MOHR v. BETHLEHEM et al
as 5:2025cv05736
Plaintiff:
RYAN MOHR
Defendant:
CITY OF BETHLEHEM, LEHIGH COUNTY, SERGEANT JOHN DOE 1 and others
Cross-Complainant:
LEHIGH COUNTY
Cross-Defendant:
CITY OF BETHLEHEM, POLICE OFFICER SAM DOMENICO and POLICE OFFICER GONZALEZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Godbey v. CITY OF BETHLEHEM et al
as 5:2025cv04619
Plaintiff:
Katrina Godbey
Defendant:
CITY OF BETHLEHEM, Officer Duncan Cahalan and JOHN DOE POLICE OFFICERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Godbey v. CITY OF BETHLEHEM et al
as 2:2025cv04619
Plaintiff:
Katrina Godbey
Defendant:
CITY OF BETHLEHEM, Officer Duncan Cahalan and Police Officer John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2025cv01107
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-2925
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv03336
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
