Cases 1 - 10 of 42
Thomas Gage v. Borough of Hopatcong, et al
as 26-1099
Plaintiff:
THOMAS I. GAGE
Defendant:
BOROUGH OF HOPATCONG, JOHN K. RUSCHKE, PE, WILLIAM T. DONEGAN, SR. and others
GAGE v. BOROUGH OF HOPATCONG et al
as 2:2025cv03696
Plaintiff:
THOMAS I. GAGE
Defendant:
BOROUGH OF HOPATCONG, JOHN K. RUSCHKE, WILLIAM DONEGAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Zaragoza v. Prime Care Inc. Employees
as 1:2025cv00706
Plaintiff:
Enio Fico Zaragoza
Defendant:
Prime Care Inc. Employees
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv02063
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Zaragoza v. Prime Care Employee Jane Doe's et al
as 1:2024cv01464
Defendant:
Prime Care Employee Jane Doe's, Prime Care Employee John Doe's and Central Booking Dauphin County
Plaintiff:
Enio Fico Zaragoza
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Zaragoza v. Dauphin County Bureau of Police Department
as 1:2024cv01415
Plaintiff:
Enio Fico Zaragoza
Defendant:
Dauphin County Bureau of Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs et al v. In Re: FICO Antitrust Litigation et al
as 1:2024cv04962
Unknown:
In Re: FICO Antitrust Litigation
Respondent:
VantageScore Solutions LLC
Petitioner:
Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs and Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs
Cause Of Action: 02 U.S.C. § 431 Fed. Election Commission: Failure Enforce Compliance
Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs et al v. In Re: FICO Antitrust Litigation et al
as 3:2024mc80144
Unknown:
In Re: FICO Antitrust Litigation
Petitioner:
Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs and Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs
Respondent:
VantageScore Solutions, LLC
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2021cv05723
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
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.
