Cases 1 - 10 of 10
RANSOME v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2016cv03142
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOUGLAS RANSOME
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
BITTING v. KERESTES et al
as 2:2016cv00578
Petitioner:
JOHN DOUGLAS BITTING, IV
Respondent:
JOHN KERESTES and PA STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bitting IV v. Kerestes
as 3:2016cv00172
Respondent:
John Kerestes and PA State Attorney General
Petitioner:
John Douglas Bitting IV
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
RANSOME v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2015cv05972
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOUGLAS RANSOME
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
THORNBERG v. ASTRUE
as 2:2011cv00570
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOUGLAS THORNBERG
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
DOUGLAS et al v. JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION et al
as 2:2011cv62447
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOUGLAS and SOPHIE DOUGLAS
Defendant:
JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION , JOHNS-MANVILLE SALES CORPORATION , JOHNS-MANVILLE PRODUCTS CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PARKER v. UNITED STATES
as 2:2010cv03421
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOUGLAS PARKER
Defendant:
UNITED STATES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
PERRY v. RAPID-AMERICAN CORPORATION et al
as 2:2008cv86723
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOUGLAS PERRY and JOHN DOUGLAS PERRY
Defendant:
RAPID-AMERICAN CORPORATION, THE BENDIX CORPORATION, OWENS-ILLINOIS, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
CREEL et al v. A.M. LOCKETT & CO., ET AL.
as 2:2008cv76950
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOUGLAS CREEL, SR. and JOHN DOUGLAS CREEL, SR.
Defendant:
A.M. LOCKETT & COMPANY, LTD., A.P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., ALLIED EQUIPMENT, INCORPORATED and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
RANSOME v. UNITED STATES
as 2:2007cv02206
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOUGLAS RANSOME
Defendant:
UNITED STATES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
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.
