Cases 31 - 40 of 343
WILKERSON v. SUPERINTENDENT EASON et al
as 2:2021cv01954
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, SUPERINTENDENT EASON and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Petitioner:
OTIS WLKERSON and OTIS WILKERSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
MCCORMICK-OTIS v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2021cv03895
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC. and JOHNSON & JOHNSON
Plaintiff:
PATRICIA MCCORMICK-OTIS
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv03781
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv00088
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
Fudge v. Marsh et al
as 4:2020cv02112
Defendant:
Dr. Jeffrey Boland, John Doe(s), John Doe(s) Correctional Officers and others
Plaintiff:
Dolphus Otis Fudge
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Phillips v. Robert May Warden
as 1:2020cv01054
Respondent:
Robert May Warden
Petitioner:
Otis Phillips
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv03813
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Cyril Pyle v. Otis Elevator Co
as 20-2393
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CYRIL PYLE
Defendant / Appellee:
OTIS ELEVATOR CO
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv03065
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
DELIONS et al v. CARNEGIE INSTITUTE et al
as 2:2020cv00487
Plaintiff:
MALISA A. DELIONS, JOHN T. MCCAFFREY, MICHEALA F. CASTILLO and others
Defendant:
CARNEGIE INSTITUTE, OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY, WESTINGHOUSE LICENSING CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
