Cases 21 - 30 of 4,778
Das et al v. Lowell Five Cents Savings Bank et al
as 1:2024cv10931
Plaintiff:
Abhijit Das, Mitra Das, Dr Mukti Das and others
Defendant:
Lowell Five Cents Savings Bank, David Wallace, John Pratt, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Efron v. UBS Financial Services Incorporated
as 3:2024cv01168
Plaintiff:
David Efron
Defendant:
UBS Financial Services Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
Cogley v. State of Rhode Island, et al
as 24-1309
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL COGLEY
Defendant:
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island Governor 2013-2015 in his official capacity, GINA M. RAIMONDO, Rhode Island Governor 2015-2021 in her official capacity and others
Briggs, et al v. Scanlan, et al
as 24-1316
Plaintiff:
LYNN-DIANE BRIGGS, WAYNE P. SAYA, SR. and KAREN TESTERMAN
Defendant:
DAVID SCANLAN, Secretary of State, NH and CHRIS AGER, Chairman, NH Republican State Committee
Interested Party:
NORMAN J. SILBER
US v. Belhassan
as 24-1303
Appellant:
UNITED STATES
Defendant:
MEHDI BELHASSAN
Interested Party:
GUIOMAR ALVAREZ, DONNIE AMADO, MATHIEU AMAR and others
GARCIA v. CHAPMAN
as 2:2024cv00109
Plaintiff:
LEIGHANN GARCIA
Defendant:
DAVID CHAPMAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Callahan v. Giammarco, RN et al
as 1:2024cv00119
Plaintiff:
Ryan Callahan
Defendant:
Bianca Giammarco, RN, David Sasso Jr., APRN, LT. Perry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dyson v. Atrium Medical Corporation et al
as 1:2024cv00088
Plaintiff:
David Dyson
Defendant:
Atrium Medical Corporation and Maquet Cardiovascular US Sales, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
EASY PAY SOLUTIONS INC v. CROOKS
as 2:2024cv00106
Plaintiff:
EASY PAY SOLUTIONS INC
Defendant:
DAVID S CROOKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty
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.
