Cases 41 - 50 of 144
THOMAS v. COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY, PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2022cv00196
Plaintiff:
ROBERT THOMAS
Defendant:
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY, PENNSYLVANIA, COLEMAN MCDONOUGH, SCOTT SCHERER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
AV2 v. MCDONOUGH et al
as 2:2022cv00369
Plaintiff:
AV2
Defendant:
DENIS RICHARD MCDONOUGH, MONIQUE SMART, LLOYD J. AUSTIN, III and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Right to Privacy Act
BERTRAND-WHATLEY v. DENIS R. MCDONOUGH, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF VETERAN'S AFFAIRS
as 2:2022cv00368
Plaintiff:
MARIE BERTRAND-WHATLEY
Defendant:
DENIS R. MCDONOUGH, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF VETERAN'S AFFAIRS
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00007
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
VALENTE v. LEONARD B. ZUCKER, ESQ et al
as 1:2022cv00017
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY A. VALENTE
Defendant:
LEONARD B. ZUCKER, ESQ, DOUGLAS J. MCDONOUGH, ESQ, ZUCKER, GOLDBERG & ACKERMAN, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv05586
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv01756
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
GASTON v. TUCKER et al
as 3:2021cv19432
Plaintiff:
TONI M. GASTON
Defendant:
FORREST TUCKER, DONALD CHAMBERS, WENDY APUZZO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Don Ascolese v. Shoemaker Construction Co, et al
as 21-2899
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DON ASCOLESE
Defendant:
SHOEMAKER CONSTRUCTION CO and SHOEMAKER SYNTERRA JV
Defendant / Appellee:
MCDONOUGH BOLYARD PECK INC
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv13373
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
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.
