Cases
ROGERS v. HENSON et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2012cv00438
Plaintiff: CLARENCE ROGERS
Defendant: JOHN BENTLY HENSON and CITY OF PGH POLICE DEPT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROGERS v. STANLEY et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2012cv00439
Plaintiff: CLARENCE ROGERS
Defendant: KIMERLY STANLEY and CITY OF PGH POLICE DEPT.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robert Rucker v. City of PGH, et al
as 11-3601
Plaintiff - Appellee: ROBERT L RUCKER
Defendant - Appellee: CITY OF PGH, TIMOTHY MATSON, individually and in his official capacity and LEROY SCHROCK, individually and in his official capacity
Defendant - Appellant: NEAL MARABELLO, individually and in his official capacity
Charles Jackson v. City of PGH, et al
as 10-3802
Plaintiff - Appellant: CHARLES JACKSON
Defendant - Appellee: CITY OF PGH, TIMOTHY KREGER, individually and as agent of the City of Pittsburgh, PA, ERIC HOLMES, individually and as agent of the City of Pittsburgh, PA and others
Cecil Brookins v. Talib Ghafoor, et al
as 09-2453
Plaintiff - Appellant: CECIL BROOKINS
Defendant - Appellee: PGH POLICE OFFICERS, NATHAN HARPER, Commander, Commander In Charge of Barricade situation; police officer of the City of Pittsburgh, RASHALL BRACKNEY- GRIFFIN, in her Official capacity as a Cmdr Tactical, Police Officer for the City of Pittsburgh, in charge of the swat at the incident/shooting/crime scene, also in her individual and personal capacities and others
Melrose Inc v. City of Pittsburgh, et al
as 08-4425
Plaintiff - Appellant: MELROSE INC
Defendant - Appellee: CITY OF PITTSBURGH, CITY OF PGH ZONING BD OF ADJUSTMENT, CLIFFORD B. LEVINE, Esq. and others
Mary Brown v. City of Pittsburgh
as 08-1819
Plaintiff - Appellant: MARY K. BROWN
Defendant - Appellee: CITY OF PITTSBURGH, MAYOR OF CITY OF PGH and PGH CITY CNCL
Not Party - Proposed Amicus-Appellant: NATL LEGAL FNDTN

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.


Why Is My Information Online?