Cases 1 - 10 of 93
Ditkoff v. Wolff et al
as 1:2024cv01955
Plaintiff:
Charles J. Ditkoff
Defendant:
Dr. Andrew B. Wolff and Michael E. Wolff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity Action
Butler v. Eddy et al.
as 3:2024cv00461
Plaintiff:
Benjanell Butler, Jr.
Defendant:
Dr. Andrew Eddy, David Caudill and Landon Kohls
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sofia Cano v. South Carolina Department of Corrections
as 24-6200
Plaintiff:
SOFIA CANO
Defendant:
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, BRYAN P. STIRLING, DR. CHRIS KUNKLE and others
Gonzalez v. Fromm et al
as 1:2023cv16475
Plaintiff:
Jorge Gonzalez
Defendant:
Neal Fromm, Dr. Andrew West, Dr. Vipin Shah and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
In re: Merck Mumps Vaccine Antitrust Litigation
as 23-3089
Plaintiff / Appellee:
CHATOM PRIMARY CARE PC, ON BEHALF OF ITSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, DR. ANDREW KLEIN and JOHN IVAN SUTTER, M.D.
Defendant / Appellant:
MERCK & CO INC
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv05389
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
In Re: Merck Mumps Vaccine Antitrust Litigation, et al
as 23-8046
Petitioner:
MERCK & CO INC
Respondent:
CHATOM PRIMARY CARE PC, On Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated, DR. ANDREW KLEIN and JOHN IVAN SUTTER, M.D.
Howard v. Bisenius et al
as 1:2023cv12176
Plaintiff:
David Howard
Defendant:
Theresa A Bisenius, Jennifer M Ulwick, Mary Rudolph Black and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Stilson v. Grasley et al
as 3:2023cv00980
Plaintiff:
Max Dudley Stilson
Defendant:
Dr. Andrew Barnes Grasley and Israel Jacquez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ryan v. Grasley et al
as 3:2023cv00964
Plaintiff:
Christopher Ryan
Defendant:
Dr. Andrew Barnes Grasley and Israel Jacquez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
