Cases 1 - 10 of 80
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2024cv04278
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1101 Immigration and Nationality Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv07345
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Scarcella v. Misuraca et al
as 1:2023cv01382
Plaintiff:
Kevin Scarcella
Defendant:
Mark Misuraca, Village of Coxsackie, Village of Coxsackie Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00105
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
EVANS v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 3:2023cv19526
Plaintiff:
MARK EVANS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
AUGUSTINE v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv13329
Plaintiff:
MARK EVAN AUGUSTINE
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
EVANS v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv12593
Plaintiff:
MARK EVANS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02708
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
SPROLES v. INDIANA LAW ENFORCEMENT ACADEMY et al
as 1:2023cv00431
Plaintiff:
MARK EVAN SPROLES
Defendant:
INDIANA LAW ENFORCEMENT ACADEMY and INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 dp Fed. Question: Violation of Due Process
Flynn v. County of Contra Costa, et al
as 3:2021cv06996
Plaintiff:
Christina Flynn
Defendant:
County of Contra Costa, City Of Concord, Jason Colon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
