Cases 1 - 10 of 41
Pendell v. Shanley
as 24-526
Petitioner:
PERRY PENDELL
Respondent:
RAYMOND SHANLEY, Superintendent of Coxsackie Correctional facility
Pendell v. Sanofi Aventis U.S. LLC et al
as 2:2022cv02604
Plaintiff:
Tori Pendell
Defendant:
Sanofi Aventis U.S. LLC, Sanofi US Services, Inc. f/k/a Sanofi-Aventis US Inc., Sanofi US Services Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Pendell v. Shanley
as 22-1112
Petitioner / Appellant:
Perry Pendell
Respondent / Appellee:
Raymond Shanley, Superintendent of Coxsackie Correctional Facility
Fine Line Homes, L.P. et al v. Hamilton Building Services et al
as 1:2022cv00660
Plaintiff:
Fine Line Homes, L.P. and Fine Line Homes, Inc.
Defendant:
Hamilton Building Services, Eric Barden, Cooley Construction Services, Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
ANDERSON v. ENGLERT et al
as 2:2021cv00620
Defendant:
KOZLOWSKI, RICHARD FITZGERALD, PENDELL and others
Plaintiff:
BRIAN L. ANDERSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Pendell v. Shanley
as 9:2021cv00201
Petitioner:
Perry Pendell
Respondent:
Raymond Shanley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PENDELL v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv73758
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
ERIC PENDELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Travis Pendell v. Spokane County, et al
as 20-35617
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TRAVIS PENDELL
Defendant / Appellee:
SPOKANE COUNTY, LARRY H. HASKELL, both in his official capacity as Spokane County Prosecutor, and individually and JOHN F. DRISCOLL, Jr., in both his official capacity as Deputy Prosecutor, and individually
Pendell v. Spokane et al
as 2:2019cv00426
Defendant:
Larry H Haskell, John F Driscoll, Jr and Spokane County, Washington
Plaintiff:
Travis Pendell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
