Cases 21 - 30 of 304
WANG v. UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH et al
as 2:2020cv01952
Defendant:
WILEY PERIODICALS, INC., UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH PHYSICIANS, MARK GLADWIN and others
Plaintiff:
NORMAN WANG
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
BETANCES v. AT&T INC. et al
as 3:2020cv02239
Defendant:
AT&T Inc. doing business as AT&T STORE WILKES BARRE, GABBY NORWOOD, OLIVER PHILPOTT and others
Plaintiff:
CARLOS BETANCES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Osagie v. Borough of State College et al
as 4:2020cv02024
Defendant:
John Does #1-10 and Borough of State College
Plaintiff:
Sylvester Osagie
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gross v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2020cv04390
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, JOHN 1-10 DOES, JOHN DOES 1-10 and others
Plaintiff:
Dr. Kenneth Gross
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BETANCES v. AT&T INC. et al
as 2:2020cv04334
Defendant:
AT&T INC. doing business as AT&T STORE WILKES BARRE, GABBY NORWOOD, OLIVER PHILPOTT and others
Plaintiff:
CARLOS BETANCES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv03921
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv03065
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
LEWIS v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2020cv03062
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, JOHN DOES 1-10, LIEUTENANT JONAH CONWAY and others
Plaintiff:
OFFICER KELLI LEWIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
CONGO v. AMERICAN AIRLINES GROUP INC. et al
as 2:2020cv02322
Defendant:
AMERICAN AIRLINES GROUP INC., JOHN DOES 1-10, BRANDON BUCHANAN and others
Plaintiff:
DEBRA CONGO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Proctor v. Pennsy Supply, Inc. et al
as 1:2020cv00746
Defendant:
Brett Thorius, Pennsy Supply, Inc., John Siminiskus and others
Plaintiff:
Russell Proctor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
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.
