Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Ricky Kamdem-Ouaffo v. Colgate Palmolive Co, et al
as 23-2982
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RICKY KAMDEM-OUAFFO, PHD
Defendant / Appellee:
COLGATE PALMOLIVE CO, HILLS PET NUTRITION, NATURASOURCE INTERNATIONAL LLC and others
Defendant:
MS. KIM, DEBRA NICHOLS, DAVE BALOGA and others
King-Banks, Melissa v. Parisi, Joe et al
as 3:2023cv00197
Plaintiff:
Melissa Sue King-Banks and Melissa King
Defendant:
Joe Parisi, Journey, Safe Haven and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
KAMDEM-OUAFFO, PHD v. COLGATE PALMOLIVE COMPANY et al
as 2:2022cv06623
Plaintiff:
RICKY E. KAMDEM-OUAFFO, PHD
Defendant:
COLGATE PALMOLIVE COMPANY, HILL'S PET NUTRITION INC, NATURASOURCE INTERNATIONAL LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gardner v. AT&T Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2018cv01889
Defendant:
AT&T Services, Inc. and Pacific Bell Telephone Company
Plaintiff:
Dawne Gardner
Dawne Gardner v. ATandT Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2018cv01891
Defendant:
AT and T Services, Inc., DOES and Pacific Bell Telephone Company
Plaintiff:
Dawne Gardner
King, Melissa v. Madison, WI Police Department, et al. et al
as 3:2016cv00851
Plaintiff:
Melissa Sue King
Defendant:
Madison, WI Police Department, et al., Heimsness, Sampson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
King, Melissa v. Garwood, Lorna et al
as 3:2016cv00354
Plaintiff:
Melissa Sue King
Defendant:
Lorna Iona Garwood, McGraw Heim Mecum, I.E. Allen Richard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lynn v. Goddard, et al
as 16-3067
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PATRICK C. LYNN
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHNNIE GODDARD, SAM CLINE, JOHN LANGFORD and others
Gardner et al v. Luzerne County et al
as 3:2007cv01947
Plaintiff:
Dawn Gardner and Rebecca Jane Thompson
Defendant:
Luzerne County, Luzerne County District Attorney's Office, David W. Lupas and others
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.
