Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Thomas Pilcher v. City of Foley, Alabama, et al
as 26-10907
Plaintiff:
THOMAS PILCHER
Defendant:
CITY OF FOLEY, ALABAMA, MAYOR, CITY OF FOLEY, ALABAMA, FOLEY POLICE CHIEF and others
Unknown:
SERVICE
Pilcher v. City of Foley, Alabama et al
as 1:2025cv00072
Plaintiff:
Thomas Pilcher
Defendant:
City of Foley, Alabama, Ralph Hellmich, Thurston Bullock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ashe v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
as 3:2024cv00170
Plaintiff:
John Ashe
Defendant:
Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC
Cannon v. Benicia Marina Corporation et al
as 4:2023cv00204
Plaintiff:
Lady Benjamin Cannon
Defendant:
Benicia Marina Corporation, Ryan Opfer and John Ash
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
ASH v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv49621
Plaintiff:
JOHN ASH
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Ashe v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
as 3:2016cv01848
Plaintiff:
John Ashe
Defendant:
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227
Ashe v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
as 3:2016cv00731
Plaintiff:
John Ashe
Defendant:
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
Cause Of Action: Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
Ash et al v. The Burlington Insurance Company
as 6:2015cv00028
Plaintiff:
Joe Ash and John Ash
Defendant:
The Burlington Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
Kerins v. Ash et al
as 2:2008cv00704
Plaintiff:
Michael OConnor Maxwell Kerins
Defendant:
John Ash, John Ash, Benicia Harbor Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Kerins v. Ash et al
as 2:2008at00368
Plaintiff:
Michael O'Connor M Kerins
Defendant:
John Ash, John Ash, Benicia Harbor Corporation dba Benicia Marina and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Sex Discrimination
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.
