Cases 1 - 10 of 100
David Bardes v. George Bush, et al
as 26-3585
Plaintiff:
DAVID ANDREW BARDES
Defendant:
GEORGE WALKER BUSH, individually, RICHARD BRUCE CHENEY, individually, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II, individually and others
Heck v. Social Security, Commissioner of
as 1:2026cv12167
Plaintiff:
David Andrew Heck
Defendant:
Social Security, Commissioner of
Interested Party:
(Court Use Only) SSA Notification - Office of General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Lori Grohol v. Pennsylvania Courts Administrative Office, et al
as 26-2595
Plaintiff:
LORI GROHOL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Defendant:
PENNSYLVANIA COURTS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, AMERICAN BAR ASS'N, BLOOMSBURG FAIR ASS'N and others
Gregory Peet, Sr. v. Scott County, Missouri, et al
as 26-2221
Plaintiff:
Gregory Allen Peet, Sr.
Defendant:
Scott County, Missouri, Scott County Prosecutor's Office, Scott County Circuit Clerk's Office and others
REYNOLDS v. BISIGNANO
as 2:2026cv01247
Plaintiff:
DAVID ANDREW REYNOLDS
Defendant:
FRANK J. BISIGNANO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 (g) Social Security (RSI)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2026cv01515
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Grohol v. Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts et al
as 4:2026cv01437
Plaintiff:
Lori Grohol
Defendant:
Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, American Bar Association, Bloomsburg Fair Association and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
KOHAN et al v. CITY OF LATROBE et al
as 2:2026cv00363
Defendant:
DAVID ANDREW MATHENY, CITY OF LATROBE, ERIC J. BARTELS and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL KOHAN and SHIRLEY KOHAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Andrews v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al
as 1:2026cv01216
Plaintiff:
David Andrews
Defendant:
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity Action
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.
