Cases 1 - 10 of 639
Powell v. Semple et al
as 3:2024cv00480
Plaintiff:
Rashane Powell
Defendant:
Semple and Connecticut Department of Correction
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lettieri v. Matson et al
as 3:2024cv00434
Plaintiff:
David C. Lettieri
Defendant:
Karen Matson, The Broome County Humane Society, David Gaska and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Powell v. DeWees et al
as 1:2024cv01338
Plaintiff:
WESLEY POWELL
Defendant:
John DeWees, JOHN CAMPBELL and KARL GEE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 fd Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Powell v. Liberty Insurance Corporation
as 1:2024cv00989
Plaintiff:
Ainsworth T Powell
Defendant:
Liberty Insurance Corporation
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 635 Breach of Insurance Contract
Muhammad v. Board of Govenors of the Federal Reserve System et al
as 3:2024cv00133
Plaintiff:
Jamil Abdul Muhammad
Defendant:
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Jerome H Powell and John C. Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Powell v. Maldonado
as 24-240
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DARNEL POWELL
Defendant / Appellee:
LISA MALDONADO, ANN ALEXANDER, WESTBURY TEACHER ASSOCIATION and others
Powell v. Maldonado
as 24-102
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DARNEL POWELL
Defendant / Appellee:
LISA MALDONADO, ANN ALEXANDER, WESTBURY TEACHER ASSOCIATION and others
Powell v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 2:2024cv00075
Plaintiff:
Danoria Powell
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Clark v. State of Connecticut
as 23-8105
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GORDON CLARK, -, in his individual capacity, in his capacities as husband, sole fiduciary, sole beneficiary, and sole creditor of the Estate of Lillian J. Clark
Defendant / Appellee:
STATE OF CONNECTICUT, Office of Governor NED LAMONT, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 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.
