Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv04204
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
STATEN v. RANSOM et al
as 2:2020cv04454
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF ABRAHAM, DONALD VAUGHN, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MICHAEL FISHER and others
Petitioner:
HAROLD STATEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
FISHER v. TRANS UNION, LLC et al
as 2:2019cv00679
Defendant:
CELTIC BANK, DISCOVER BANK, CAPITAL ONE, N.A. and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL FISHER
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
CINDRICH v. FISHER et al
as 2:2017cv01650
Plaintiff:
RITA J. CINDRICH
Defendant:
MICHAEL FISHER, GERALD J. PAPPERT, THOMAS W. CORBETT, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729
GOCHIN v. THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY et al
as 2:2016cv06153
Plaintiff:
DIANE R. GOCHIN
Defendant:
THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY, CARIANNE TORRISSI, THEODORE MCKEE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
DARBY v. MCKEE et al
as 2:2016cv05246
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL D. DARBY
Defendant:
THEODORE A. MCKEE, THOMAS I. VANASKIE, D. MICHAEL FISHER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MADISON v. FISHER et al
as 2:2014cv05998
Plaintiff:
YVETE MADISON
Defendant:
MICHAEL FISHER, THOMAS VANASKIE and RUGGERO ALDISERT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
VESPA v. FISHER
as 2:2011cv01648
Plaintiff:
NICOLE VESPA
Defendant:
MICHAEL FISHER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cindrich v. Fisher et al
as 1:2003cv02282
Plaintiff:
Rita J. Cindrich
Defendant:
Michael Fisher , Thomas L. Palmer , Mark A. Pacella and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CHAPMAN v. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT et al
as 2:2010cv00088
Plaintiff:
J. TODD CHAPMAN
Defendant:
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, EDWARD G. RENDELL, THOMAS CORBETT and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) 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.
