Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Mendez v. Three of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Mexico City et al
as 1:2018cv00957
Plaintiff:
Ivan L. Mendez
Defendant:
Three of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Mexico City, Judge Ms. Or Mr. Jane or John Doe I, Judge Ms. Or Mr. Jane or John Doe II and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mendez v. Three of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Mexico City et al
as 1:2018mc00180
Plaintiff:
Ivan L. Mendez
Defendant:
Three of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Mexico City, Judge Ms. Or Mr. Jane or John Doe I, Judge Ms. Or Mr. Jane or John Doe II and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kostyshyn v. Cooper et al
as 1:2016cv01063
Plaintiff:
Peter Kostyshyn
Defendant:
Carla Cooper, Cathy McKay, Connections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DiFlorio v. City of Dover et al
as 1:2015cv00186
Plaintiff:
Stephen DiFlorio
Defendant:
City of Dover, Brian K. Berns, Melvin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane v. Doe et al
as 1:2009cv00939
Plaintiff:
Kennard Lane
Defendant:
John Doe, I, John Doe, II, Warden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Proffitt et al v. New Castle County et al
as 1:2009cv00831
Plaintiff:
John Proffitt, Julie DiSabatino and F.D.
Defendant:
New Castle County, Robert A. Ragazzo, Angela Dolan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Mendez v. Johnson et al
as 1:2008cv00416
Plaintiff:
Ivan L. Mendez
Defendant:
Ms. Johnson, John Doe, John Doe, I and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv00830
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Watson v. Wilmington Police Department et al
as 1:2007cv00344
Plaintiff:
Dennis Watson
Defendant:
Wilmington Police Department, John Doe, I, John Doe, II and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
