Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 22
RICHARDSON v. UNITED STATES et al
as 2:2023cv03089
Plaintiff: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant: UNITED STATES and KAREN FLAGHERTY-OXLER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Medical Malpractice
RICHARDSON v. UNITED STATES
as 2:2023cv02015
Plaintiff: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant: UNITED STATES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2271 Federal Tort Claims Act
RICHARDSON v. OXLER
as 2:2023cv01134
Plaintiff: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant: KAREN FLAHERTY OXLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
RICHARDSON v. PIERCE et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2017cv02393
Plaintiff: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant: KEVIN PIERCE , THOMAS HOGAN and COUNTY OF CHESTER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
David Richardson v. Thomas Hogan, et al
as 17-1448
Plaintiff - Appellant: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant - Appellee: THOMAS HOGAN, District Attorney and PIERCE, Assistant District Attorney (ADA)
David Richardson v. John DiBattista, et al
as 17-1384
Plaintiff - Appellant: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant - Appellee: JOHN DIBATTISTA, WEST CHESTER POLICE NARCOTICS UNIT, WEST CHESTER POLICE and others
RICHARDSON v. HOGAN et al
as 2:2017cv00478
Plaintiff: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant: THOMAS HOGAN and PIERCE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHARDSON v. MCFADDEN We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2017cv00253
Petitioner: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Respondent: D. EDWARD MCFADDEN and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF CHESTER COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
RICHARDSON v. DIBATTISTA et al
as 2:2017cv00187
Plaintiff: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant: JOHN DIBATTISTA, WEST CHESTER POLICE NARCOTICS UNIT, WEST CHESTER POLICE DEPARTMENT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHARDSON v. TAYLOR et al
as 2:2016cv05535
Plaintiff: DAVID D. RICHARDSON
Defendant: MORGAN TAYLOR and BROOKS
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.


Why Is My Information Online?