Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv06035
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
SYNTHES, INC. et al v. CLARK et al
as 2:2017cv01218
Plaintiff:
SYNTHES, INC. , SYNTHES USA, LLC and DEPUY SYNTHES SALES, INC.
Defendant:
STEVEN CLARK and DAVID FOWLKES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv02975
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
SPORISH et al v. THE COUNTY OF DELAWARE, PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2012cv06363
Plaintiff:
JAMES DANIEL SPORISH and NICOLE DEANNA SPORISH
Defendant:
THE COUNTY OF DELAWARE, PENNSYLVANIA, CHILDREN YOUTH SERVICES OF DELAWARE COUNTY, CYS REPRESENTATIVES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BREEDEN et al v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE et al
as 2:2012cv06080
Plaintiff:
LOUIS BREEDEN , RICHARD L. BRAHAM, JR. , CONNIE J. BRAHAM and others
Defendant:
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, NFL PROPERTIES LLC and JOHN DOES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
FOWLKES v. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION et al
as 2:2008cv81259
Plaintiff:
GARY FOWLKES
Defendant:
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, ABER INSULATION, GRAVES-ABER INSULATION COMPANY, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
FOWLKES v. MISSISSIPPI RUBBER & SPECIALTY, et al
as 2:2008cv77301
Plaintiff:
MACK A. FOWLKES
Defendant:
MISSISSIPPI RUBBER & SPECIALTY, A-BEST CORP., DURAMETALLIC CORP. and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
FOWLKES v. AMERICAN STANDARD, INC. et al
as 2:2007cv63796
Plaintiff:
JAMES A. FOWLKES
Defendant:
AMERICAN STANDARD, INC., THE BUDD COMPANY, GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
