Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Bernard Mims v. City of Chicago, et al
as 24-1564
Plaintiff:
BERNARD MIMS
Defendant:
CITY OF CHICAGO, KENNETH BOUDREAU, RICHARD PECK and others
Young v. Razz-Wellington et al
as 3:2024cv00117
Plaintiff:
James Young
Defendant:
Jenna Razz-Wellington, Dimitar Sadiev, Richard Peck and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Li v. Connecticut
as 22-2863
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Dongmei Li
Defendant / Appellee:
State of Connecticut, Dept of Public Health, Connecticut, Dept of Mental Health & Addiction Svcs, Connecticut and others
Li v. State of Connecticut
as 22-1980
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Dongmei Li
Defendant / Appellee:
State of Connecticut, Dept of Public Health, Connecticut, Dept of Mental Health & Addiction Svcs, Connecticut and others
Li v. Connecticut et al
as 3:2021cv00996
Plaintiff:
Dongmei Li
Defendant:
State of Connecticut, Dept of Public Health, Dept of Mental Health & Addiction Svcs and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mims v. City Of Chicago et al
as 1:2018cv07192
Defendant:
Ted Przepiora (Star 20151), Richard Peck, Michael McDermott (Star 20364) and others
Plaintiff:
Bernard Mims
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mims v. Boudreau et al
as 1:2017cv07780
Plaintiff:
Bernard Mims
Defendant:
Kenneth Boudreau, Richard Peck, Robert Montgomery and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Priestley v. Panmedix Inc. et al
as 1:2013cv04755
Plaintiff:
Katherine Priestley
Defendant:
Panmedix Inc. , Parmedix Inc. , Electronic Knowledge Publishing, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Other
McNiff v. Hinterlong et al
as 1:2009cv03593
Plaintiff:
William S McNiff
Defendant:
Michael Hinterlong, Richard Peck and Diana Peck
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51 Railways: Fed. Employer's Liability Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2008cv00679
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
