Cases 1 - 10 of 105
CRESSWELL v. ACKER et al
as 2:2024cv00646
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH PAUL CRESSWELL
Defendant:
PETER C. ACKER, TIM McGONICAL, DANIEL P. WALLACE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Avid Technology, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv01137
Plaintiff:
Nathan Smith
Defendant:
Avid Technology, Inc., John P. Wallace, Christian A. Asmar and others
Jones v. Avid Technology, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv01139
Plaintiff:
Matthew Jones
Defendant:
Avid Technology, Inc., John P. Wallace, Christian A. Asmar and others
Wallace v. Revlon Consumer Products Corporation et al
as 1:2023cv12690
Plaintiff:
Christi P Wallace
Defendant:
Revlon Consumer Products Corporation, Revlon Group Holdings, LLC., Revlon, Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Wallace v. White
as 1:2023cv23077
Plaintiff:
Stephen P. Wallace
Defendant:
Steven P. White
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
Wallace v. JP Morgan Private Bank et al
as 1:2022cv01079
Plaintiff:
Stephen P. Wallace
Defendant:
JP Morgan Private Bank, James M. Inhofe, Jack Kirkpatrick and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Concerned Household Electricity Consumer's Council, et al v. EPA
as 22-1139
Petitioner:
Concerned Household Electricity Consumer's Council, Joseph S. D'Aleo, Clement Dwyer, Jr. and others
Respondent:
Environmental Protection Agency
Intervenor:
American Lung Association, American Public Health Association, Appalachian Mountain Club and others
Amicus Curiae:
William Happer, Christopher Field, Richard S. Lindzen and others
Stephen WallaceIn re: Stephen Wallace
as 22-11363
Petitioner:
In re: STEPHEN P. WALLACE
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Jones v. Hillman, et al
as 22-1256
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GERALD JONES
Defendant / Appellee:
TIMOTHY S. HILLMAN, SIDNEY HANLON, SIDNEY KEATON-WALKER and others
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.
