Cases 1 - 10 of 27
PALAMAR v. CLIFFORD et al
as 2:2023cv03552
Plaintiff:
KEILA PALAMAR
Defendant:
DANIEL J. CLIFFORD, III, CAROLYN T. CARLUCCIO and MONTGOMERY COUNTY PA.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
ZHANG v. CLIFFORD et al
as 2:2023cv01433
Plaintiff:
HUOFA MICHAEL ZHANG
Defendant:
JUDGE DANIEL CLIFFORD and COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
PALAMAR v. CLIFFORD et al
as 2:2022cv02668
Plaintiff:
KEILA PALAMAR
Defendant:
DANIEL J. CLIFFORD and MONTGOMERY COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Miles v. Moyle et al
as 3:2020cv02240
Defendant:
Richard Clifford, Robert Rachilla and Margaret B. Moyle
Plaintiff:
Donald Miles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NULL v. MCCALMONT TOWNSHIP et al
as 2:2018cv01314
Defendant:
ORRIE DUANE MANNERS, BUREAU VERITAS, DAVID L. YOUNG and others
Plaintiff:
CLIFFORD NULL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
FOSTER v. HARRIDAY et al
as 2:2018cv00114
Plaintiff:
TERRY FOSTER
Defendant:
CLIFFORD JEUDY, AL-HAKIM LEWIS, ALISHA LEWIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHARDSON v. UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2017cv05542
Plaintiff:
FRANK KENNETH RICHARDSON, JR.
Defendant:
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, ROBERT CLIFFORD and JOHN DOES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GRIFFIN v. BONITA JOHNSON et al
as 2:2017cv04584
Plaintiff:
CLIFFORD GRIFFIN
Defendant:
SYLVESTER BONITA JOHNSON, JEFFREY CHUJDIK, DANIEL J. BRADY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
REPOTSKI v. AMS LAW PC et al
as 2:2017cv03311
Plaintiff:
CLIFFORD B. REPOTSKI
Defendant:
AMS LAW PC, SHARON MEISLER and ANITA SETH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MICKMAN v. SALAMAN, GRAYSON AND HENRY et al
as 2:2017cv02452
Plaintiff:
ELAINE MICKMAN
Defendant:
SALAMAN, GRAYSON AND HENRY, CLIFFORD B. COHN and DREW SALAMAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
