Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv21669
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
TUCZAK v. LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT et al
as 1:2023cv01353
Plaintiff:
RONALD TUCZAK
Defendant:
LENAPE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, JOHN 1-10 DOES, XYZ CORP. 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrim
LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION v. FLEX MEMBRANE INTERNATIONAL CORP. et al
as 1:2019cv13035
Plaintiff:
LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION
Defendant:
FLEX MEMBRANE INTERNATIONAL CORP., RONALD MARKS ASSOCIATES, INC. D/B/A RMA TECHNOLOGIES and RONALD MARKS ASSOCIATES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301
L. S., et al v. Lenape Regional High, et al
as 17-3155
Plaintiff - Appellant:
L. S., Parent of minor child, SS and S. S.
Defendant - Appellee:
LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH, LHS, LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION, LRHSD and MERCHANTVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, MPD
LS et al v. LENAPE HIGH SCHOOL et al
as 1:2016cv01468
Plaintiff:
LS and SS
Defendant:
LENAPE HIGH SCHOOL , LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT and MERCHANTVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
SCHUHEN v. LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
as 1:2016cv00962
Plaintiff:
RUDOLPH SCHUHEN
Defendant:
LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv05724
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
A.M. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, BURLINGTON COUNTY
as 1:2009cv03099
Plaintiff:
A.M. and A.M.
Defendant:
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE LENAPE REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, BURLINGTON COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1400 Civil Rights of Handicapped Child
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.
