Cases filed in Pennsylvania
Cases 1 - 10 of 20
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv04045
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
THOMAS v. DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF LANCASTER COUNTY et al
as 5:2020cv04696
Respondent: DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF LANCASTER COUNTY, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and WARDEN
Petitioner: CHRISTIAN S. THOMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
THOMAS v. MCGINLEY et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 5:2016cv05008
Petitioner: CHRISTIAN S. THOMAS
Respondent: THOMAS MCGINLEY and BRUCE BEEMER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
POFF et al v. MCKESSON CORPORATION et al
as 2:2013cv05868
Plaintiff: MELISSA POFF , LLOYD J. PUETT , WILLIAM L. QUICK and others
Defendant: MCKESSON CORPORATION and SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv03455
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
THOMAS v. ASTRUE
as 5:2013cv01569
Plaintiff: CHRISTOPHER S. THOMAS
Defendant: MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
THOMAS v. FEDERAL BOND COLLECTION SERVICES (FCBS)
as 2:2012cv03342
Plaintiff: MELISSA S. THOMAS
Defendant: FEDERAL BOND COLLECTION SERVICES (FCBS)
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
THOMAS v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv50685
Plaintiff: ROLLAND S. THOMAS, JR.
Defendant: A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
THOMAS v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv48473
Plaintiff: DANIEL S. THOMAS
Defendant: A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
THOMAS v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv42853
Plaintiff: HOUSTON S. THOMAS
Defendant: A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688

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.


Why Is My Information Online?