Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 25-3032
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv04056
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 241 Conspiracy Against Citizen Rights
Lane et al v. Labette Health Foundation, Inc.
as 2:2022cv02392
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Lane and D. H.
Defendant:
Labette Health and Labette Health Foundation, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Lane v. Saul
as 3:2020cv00617
Defendant:
Andrew Saul
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Lane
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
LANE v. ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP et al
as 2:2019cv03918
Defendant:
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATION, THE PROCTOR & GAMBLE COMPANY and others
Plaintiff:
CYNTHIA LANE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
LANE v. DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. et al
as 1:2017cv05510
Plaintiff:
CYNTHIA LANE
Defendant:
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO U.S. HOLDINGS, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO CO., LTD. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Scott Syzak v. Dan Dammon, et al
as 15-2468
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SCOTT SYZAK
Defendant:
DAN DAMMON, Defense Attorney, MONA ARMSTRONG, Prosecutor, CYNTHIA LANE, Judge and others
Defendant - Appellee:
BAILIFF COLLINS, BAILIFF SHERIDAN, BAILIFF MONTOYA and others
Lane v. City of Chicago et al
as 1:2015cv01920
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Lane
Defendant:
City of Chicago, Officer John Doe and Officer Richard Roe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane et al v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv14687
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Lane and Gordon Lane
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc., Ethicon, LLC and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Syzak v. Dammon et al
as 4:2014cv10245
Plaintiff:
Scott Syzak
Defendant:
Dan A Dammon, Mona Armstrong, Cynthia Lane and others
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.
