Cases 1 - 10 of 35
Morin v. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Company et al
as 1:2022cv00356
Plaintiff:
Edward Morin
Defendant:
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Company, John J. Lynch, Jr., Lawrence K. Fish and others
WHITFIELD v. HOUGHTON MIFFLIN HARCOURT COMPANY et al
as 2:2022cv00916
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW WHITFIELD
Defendant:
HOUGHTON MIFFLIN HARCOURT COMPANY, JOHN J LYNCH, JR., LAWRENCE K FISH and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22 Securities Fraud
LYNCH v. BROOMALL OPERATING COMPANY LP et al
as 2:2021cv03924
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL P LYNCH and JOHN J. LYNCH, SR.
Defendant:
BROOMALL OPERATING COMPANY LP, BROOMALL OPERATING GP LLC, SAVASENIORCARE, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
VANLOAN v. THE NATION OF ISLAM et al
as 2:2021cv02559
Defendant:
POLICE CHIEF DAVID NISLEIT, MAIN LINE HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., RICHARD ORLOW and others
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN VANLOAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
John Lynch, Sr. v. , et alIn re: John Lynch, Sr. v. , et al
as 20-2474
Respondent:
EVELYN RIVERA, JOEL H. SLOMSKY and GARY F. SEITZ
Petitioner:
In re: JOHN J. LYNCH, SR.
LYNCH v. ROBINSON et al
as 2:2018cv03254
Defendant:
ROSALYN K. ROBINSON and PHILA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 1ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff:
JOHN J. LYNCH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LYNCH v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
as 2:2018cv02178
Plaintiff:
JOHN J. LYNCH
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LYNCH v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2018cv02179
Plaintiff:
JOHN J LYNCH
Defendant:
THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, SETH WILLIAMS, MATHEW WHITE D.A.'S OFFICE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00408
Trustee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Movant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00312
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
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.
