Cases 11 - 20 of 93
TAVERAS v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2019cv06163
Defendant:
OFFICER CHRISTOPHER HULMES, THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA and PHILADELPHIA POLICE OFFICERS DOE 1-3
Plaintiff:
RUDY TAVERAS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SHENKAN INJURY LAWYERS, LLC. et al v. FABIAN et al
as 2:2019cv01520
Defendant:
RUDY FABIAN and FABIAN LEGAL SERVICES, LLC.
Plaintiff:
SHENKAN INJURY LAWYERS, LLC. and RICHARD SHENKAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Rudy v. C R Bard Incorporated et al
as 1:2019cv01854
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated and Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated
Plaintiff:
William E Rudy, Jr. and John A. D'Allura
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
FABIAN et al v. SHENKAN et al
as 2:2019cv00582
Plaintiff:
FABIAN LEGAL SERVICES, LLC. and RUDY FABIAN
Defendant:
SHENKAN INJURY LAWYERS, LLC. and RICHARD E. SHENKAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Forty Four Capital, LLC et al v. Pro Line Manufacturing Co., LLC et al
as 1:2018cv02015
Plaintiff:
Forty Four Capital, LLC and Rudis Holdings, LLC
Defendant:
Samsung C&T America, Inc., Pro Line Manufacturing Co., LLC, Peter Ryu and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
DAVIS v. CAPOZZA et al
as 2:2017cv01152
Petitioner:
RUDY DAVIS
Respondent:
MARK CAPOZZA, ALLEGHENY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Rudy v. Colvin
as 3:2016cv01687
Plaintiff:
David Rudy
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Walsh v. Walsh et al
as 3:2016cv00777
Plaintiff:
John R. Walsh, III
Defendant:
Laure G. Walsh, Elizabeth Gilboy, William Dunstone and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00109
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00721
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
