Cases 1 - 10 of 17
MORRIS-CULP v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv63955
Plaintiff:
RONALD ALEXANDER MORRIS-CULP
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MORRIS v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv97002
Plaintiff:
RONALD GENE MORRIS
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Emfinger v. Hugg & Hall Equipment Company et al
as 5:2019cv00026
Plaintiff:
Whitney Emfigner and Whitney Emfinger
Defendant:
Hugg & Hall Equipment Company and Ronald Edward Morris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Morris v. USA
as 4:2017cv00080
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Ronald Roy Morris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
In Re: Paulsboro Derailment Ce, et al
as 16-3263
Plaintiff - Appellee:
RONALD J. MORRIS and KRISTEN PICKEL
Defendant - Appellant:
CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORP
Defendant - Appellee:
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO and CSX TRANSPORTATION INC
In re: Paulsboro Derailment
as 16-3172
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RONALD J. MORRIS and KRISTEN PICKEL, (husband & wife)
Defendant - Appellee:
CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORP, NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO and CSX TRANSPORTATION INC
MORRIS v. CREWS
as 3:2014cv00012
Petitioner:
RONALD K MORRIS
Respondent:
MICHAEL D CREWS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Morris v. Colvin
as 2:2013cv01767
Plaintiff:
Ronald C. Morris
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
MORRIS et al v. CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION et al
as 1:2013cv03244
Plaintiff:
RONALD J. MORRIS and KRISTEN PICKEL
Defendant:
CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION, NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY and CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Hill v. Rastatter et al
as 3:2012cv00173
Plaintiff:
Alphonzo H Hill
Defendant:
Douglas M Rastatter, David A Wilson and Ronald E Morris
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1985
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.
