Cases 21 - 30 of 30
JOHNSON v. USA
as 2:2012cv00073
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
MICHAEL JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
JOHNSON v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al
as 2:2011cv00946
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JOHNSON
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION and GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Johnson v. Moore Smeal et al
as 1:2011cv00038
Plaintiff:
Michael Johnson
Defendant:
Shirley R Moore Smeal, Marrosa Lamas, Robert J. Marsh, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOHNSON v. PHILLIPS et al
as 2:2010cv07480
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JOHNSON
Defendant:
RUTH B. PHILLIPS and WILBUR J. PHILLIPS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CAVENDISH FARMS, INC. v. BROOKS PROVISIONS, LLC et al
as 2:2010cv02079
Plaintiff:
CAVENDISH FARMS, INC.
Defendant:
BROOKS PROVISIONS, LLC, LANCE WIMMER, MICHAEL JOHNSON and others
Cause Of Action: 07 U.S.C. § 499 Agricultural Commodities Act
JOHNSON v. MARKO et al
as 2:2009cv06161
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JOHNSON
Defendant:
GEORGE MARKO , JOSEPH KELLY , CITY OF PHILADELPHIA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Varano et al
as 1:2009cv02257
Petitioner:
Michael Johnson
Respondent:
David A. Varano, Joseph J. Piazza, Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JOHN v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
as 2:2009cv05430
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JOHNSON
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Johnson et al v. Yost et al
as 1:2009cv01397
Plaintiff:
Michael Johnson and Denine Townsend
Defendant:
Brian Yost and Hanover Borough Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
JOHNSON v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
as 2:2009cv00418
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JOHNSON
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
