Cases 41 - 50 of 134
ARMSTRONG v. J.A. CAMBECE LAW OFFICE, P.C. et al
as 2:2017cv01032
Plaintiff:
RICHARD T. ARMSTRONG
Defendant:
J.A. CAMBECE LAW OFFICE, P.C. and CACH, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
J.A. et al v. Dallas
as 1:2017cv00358
Plaintiff:
J.A. and T.A.
Defendant:
Theodore Dallas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1396
NYBECK v. FOSTER WHEELER LLC et al
as 2:2016cv06570
Plaintiff:
RICHARD NYBECK
Defendant:
FOSTER WHEELER LLC , A.O.SMITH CORP. , ALLEN-SHERMAN-HOFF and others
Cross_claimant:
ALLEN-SHERMAN-HOFF , CRANE CO. , GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY and others
Cross_defendant:
ALLEN-SHERMAN-HOFF , A.O.SMITH CORP. , AMTICO DIVISION OF AMERICAN BILTRITE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2016cv06391
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv01367
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv04785
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1400
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv01249
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
NEGRON v. HOLGUIN et al
as 2:2016cv03965
Plaintiff:
SACHA NEGRON
Defendant:
MIGUEL HOLGUIN, J.A. BURKE, JOSEPH FUENTES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BAILEY v. OVERMEYER et al
as 1:2016cv00086
Plaintiff:
DEMETRIUS BAILEY
Defendant:
MICHAEL OVERMEYER, J.A. HORTON, D.F. OBERLANDER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WARREN v. ECKARD et al
as 2:2016cv00052
Petitioner:
KEITH WARREN
Respondent:
J.A. ECKARD, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
