Cases 1 - 10 of 123
Cox #095548 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2024cv00705
Plaintiff:
Walter John Cox, Jr.
Defendant:
Ryan Thornell, Charles L Ryan, Lori Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Taras Raggio v. Chris Davis
as 24-1214
Plaintiff:
TARAS N. RAGGIO, PHD
Defendant:
SHERIFF CHRIS DAVIS, Pamlico County Sheriffs Office, SHERIFF ALFRED CHIP HUGHES, Craven County Sheriffs Office, SHERIFF ENNIS WRIGHT, Cumberland County Sheriffs Office and others
COX v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv31134
Plaintiff:
JOHN COX
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
COX v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv22690
Plaintiff:
JOHN COX
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Minzer v. Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv06719
Plaintiff:
Shoshana Minzer
Defendant:
Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc., Douglas Cole, Stephen Oesterle and others
Mammoser v. Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv06353
Plaintiff:
Donald Mammoser
Defendant:
Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc., Rogerio Vivaldi Coelho, Doug Cole and others
Dixon v. Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv00788
Plaintiff:
Brian Dixon
Defendant:
Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc., Eric Shaff, Robert Ruffolo, Jr. and others
Smith v. Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv00787
Plaintiff:
Nathan Smith
Defendant:
Sigilon Therapeutics, Inc., Eric Shaff, Robert Ruffolo, Jr. and others
RAGGIO v. DAVIS et al
as 1:2023cv00430
Plaintiff:
TARAS N. RAGGIO
Defendant:
SHERIFF CHRIS DAVIS, SHERIFF ALFRED CHIP HUGHES, SHERIFF ENNIS WRIGHT and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2023cv01143
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
