Cases 1 - 10 of 27
JOHNSON v. ADAMS et al
as 1:2022cv00291
Petitioner:
MICHAEL ROLAND JOHNSON
Respondent:
MELINDA ADAMS, JOSHUA SHAPIRO and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ERIE COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vought v. Brighton et al
as 3:2022cv01448
Plaintiff:
Erica Rose Vought
Defendant:
Chris Brighton, MD. PHD. Michael W. Johnson, Kevin Stroyan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
LITTLE v. ECCLESIASTICAL MOORS et al
as 2:2022cv00843
Plaintiff:
PARRIS LITTLE and JEAN ELIZABETH LLC
Defendant:
ECCLESIASTICAL MOORS, PRINCE MIKHAIL EL, PRINCE MICHAEL DAVID JOHNSON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
JOHNSON v. TITUSVILLE, PA CITY MANAGER et al
as 1:2021cv00083
Defendant:
TITUSVILLE, PA CITY MANAGER, TITUSVILLE, PA CITY MAYOR, DUSTIN LEGOULON and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JAMES JOHNSON, 1ST and MICHAEL J JOHNSON, I
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MITRECIC v. ELITE TRANSIT SOLUTIONS, LLC et al
as 2:2021cv00210
Defendant:
ELITE TRANSIT SOLUTIONS, LLC, MICHAEL D. JOHNSON and JANE/JOHN DOE
Plaintiff:
NAFISA MITRECIC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv03377
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv00083
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv00078
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv01656
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv01591
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
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.
