Cases 1 - 10 of 13
DUBBS DRED, INC. et al v. AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY
as 2:2023cv01659
Plaintiff:
DUBBS DRED, INC. and DUBBS DRED II, INC.
Defendant:
AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal-Insurance Contract
Murray Associates Architects, P.C. et al v. Pine Ridge Construction Management, LLC et al
as 1:2022cv00460
Plaintiff:
Murray Associates Architects, P.C. and Benedict Dubbs
Defendant:
Pine Ridge Construction Management, LLC and PRCM Holdings, LLC
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Sewell v. Bowman et al
as 1:2015cv01849
Plaintiff:
Gregory Lee Sewell
Defendant:
Daniel S. Bowman, Michael A. George and Dwayne Dubbs
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hofnagle v. Pine Grove Borough et al
as 3:2012cv02468
Plaintiff:
Chad Hofnagle
Defendant:
Pine Grove Borough , Kimberly D. Brown-Zerbe , Christopher W. Hobbs and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv01686
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
Rodriguez v. Chronister et al
as 1:2012cv00393
Plaintiff:
Santos Ramos Rodriguez
Defendant:
John H. Chronister, John S. Kennedy, Seamus D. Dubbs and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Snellings v. Sabol et al
as 3:2012cv00240
Plaintiff:
Sheldon Snellings
Defendant:
Mary Sabol, Clare Doll, Bonno and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DUBBS v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv49279
Plaintiff:
BURTIS D. DUBBS
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv00893
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Bickford v. Frantz et al
as 1:2009cv00161
Plaintiff:
Darren Bickford
Defendant:
Benjamin A. Frantz, Chad Corbett, James Long and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
