Cases 1 - 10 of 2,564
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv03485
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Ali v. Dexter et al
as 5:2024ct03103
Plaintiff:
Abdulkadir Sharif Ali
Defendant:
Janet M. Dexter, Hunter Fonvielle, Kayla Mercer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Matze v. Parler LLC et al
as 2:2024cv00826
Plaintiff:
John Matze
Defendant:
PARLER LLC, NDMAscendant, LLC, Jeffrey Wernick and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00238
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
SHAMRO v. PENNSYLVANIA PAROLE BOARD et al
as 2:2024cv00608
Petitioner:
JOSH SHAMRO
Respondent:
PENNSYLVANIA PAROLE BOARD and SUPERINTENDENT OF SCI MERCER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00064
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
MERCER-SPENCER v. SPENCER et al
as 5:2024cv00834
Plaintiff:
DEBRA M. MERCER-SPENCER
Defendant:
NATHANIL BRONDON SPENCER, SR., BERKS COUNTY JAIL SYSTEMS and THE ARRESTING OFFICER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jeffrey Rasawehr v. Jeff Grey, et al
as 24-3322
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY RASAWEHR
Defendant:
SHERIFF JEFF GREY, Mercer County, OH, MERCER COUNTY, OH and DEPUTY SHERIFF CHAD FORTKAMP, Mercer County, OH
GEE v. COUNTY OF MERCER
as 3:2024cv05319
Plaintiff:
ANTONIO GEE
Defendant:
COUNTY OF MERCER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal- Civil Rights Act
Mercer v. New York City Police Dept. 47 Precint et al
as 1:2024cv02827
Plaintiff:
Ira Mercer
Defendant:
New York City Police Dept. 47 Precint, Detective Christopher Sally, Officer Sutton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
