Cases 31 - 40 of 944
Mortman v. Natus Medical, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv04951
Plaintiff:
Frederick Mortman
Defendant:
Natus Medical, Inc., Joshua H. Levine, Thomas J. Sullivan and others
Jones et al v. Ford Motor Company
as DE/1:22-CV-00759
Plaintiff:
Jones, Samantha Jones, Angela Kelley and others
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Schroeder v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs, The
as 2:2022cv02209
Plaintiff:
Thomas Schroeder
Defendant:
United States Department of Veterans Affairs, The
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Waterman v. Natus Medical, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv03341
Plaintiff:
Marc Waterman
Defendant:
Natus Medical, Inc., Joshua H. Levine, Thomas J. Sullivan and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22 Securities Fraud
Whitfield v. Natus Medical, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv03302
Plaintiff:
Matthew Whitfield
Defendant:
Natus Medical, Inc., Joshua H. Levine, Thomas J. Sullivan and others
Stein v. Natus Medical Incorporated et al
as 1:2022cv04423
Plaintiff:
Shiva Stein
Defendant:
Natus Medical Incorporated, Joshua H. Levine, Thomas J. Sullivan and others
Schallman v. Natus Medical Incorporated et al
as 1:2022cv04391
Plaintiff:
Nanci Schallman
Defendant:
Natus Medical Incorporated, Joshua H. Levine, Thomas J. Sullivan and others
Morgan v. Schroeder Referral Systems, Inc.
as 5:2022cv00407
Plaintiff:
Ann Morgan
Defendant:
Schroeder Referral Systems, Inc. doing business as Injury Referral Group
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Seanderyl Crawford v. City of Detroit, MI, et al
as 21-1734
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SEANDERYL CRAWFORD
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF DETROIT, MI, DETROIT, MI POLICE DEPARTMENT, HEIDI E. WASHINGTON, Director and others
Derrick Allen, Sr. v. L. Auld
as 21-2289
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DERRICK MICHAEL ALLEN, SR.
Defendant / Appellee:
MAGISTRATE JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD and DISTRICT COURT JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER
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.
