Cases 1 - 10 of 34
Spirdione #947841 v. Wood
as 1:2024cv00824
Defendant:
Rebecca Wood
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Alan Spirdione #947841
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilson v. Kelley et al
as 5:2024cv12063
Defendant:
S. Rykes, Rebecca Wood, Mahalic and others
Plaintiff:
Eric Wilson
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Spirdione #947841 v. Wood
as 1:2024cv00467
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Alan Spirdione #947841
Defendant:
Rebecca Wood
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HADLEY HOUSE AUTHORITY et al v. WOODS
as 1:2023cv00746
Plaintiff:
HADLEY HOUSE AUTHORITY and AMHERST HOUSING AUTHORITY
Defendant:
R. SUSAN WOODS and REBECCA WOODS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Wood v. The United States of America
as 4:2023cv00060
Plaintiff:
Rebecca Wood
Defendant:
The United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Tort Claim
Boure v. Redington et al
as 2:2022cv00077
Plaintiff:
Stephen A. Boure
Defendant:
Daniel Redington, Lacey Twellman, Rebecca Woods and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wood v. Saul
as 3:2021cv00042
Plaintiff:
Rebecca Wood
Defendant:
Andrew M. Saul
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
WOODS v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2019cv18978
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC, JOHNSON JOHNSON &, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. and others
Plaintiff:
REBECCA WOODS
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Lynn v. Brown, et al
as 19-5063
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN DOES, sued as John Does 1-100, THEODORE RIESLING, an individual a/k/a Ted, KIMBERLY BIEDLER SCHUTZ, an individual and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROSEMARY ANN LYNN
Woods v. County of Onondaga
as 5:2019cv00760
Defendant:
County of Onondaga
Plaintiff:
Rebecca Woods
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
