Cases 1 - 10 of 262
Sokol v. Union Pacific Railroad Company et al
as 1:2024cv02907
Plaintiff:
ADAM SOKOL
Defendant:
Union Pacific Railroad Company and Pacific Rail Services, LLC
Cross Defendant:
NORTIA LOGISTICS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-3141
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03190
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 w - Fed. Question: Wrongful Termination of Employment
Millennium Funding, Inc. et al v. Hierl et al
as 1:2023cv16372
Plaintiff:
Millennium Funding, Inc., BODYGUARD PRODUCTIONS, INC. and LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC.
Defendant:
Michael A. Hierl and Hughes Sokol Piers Resnick & Dym, Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Breach of Contract
SOKOL v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv23376
Plaintiff:
ANDREW SOKOL
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Martinez v. Griffin Health Corporation et al
as 3:2023cv00839
Plaintiff:
Solange Martinez
Defendant:
Griffin Health Corporation, Waterbury Hospital, Griffin Family Physicians and others
Talley v. Harry et al
as 1:2023cv01033
Plaintiff:
Quintez Talley
Defendant:
Dr. Laurel Harry, MHM, Inc., Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Oyarzun v. Griffin Health Corporation et al
as 3:2023cv00683
Plaintiff:
Luisa Oyarzun
Defendant:
Griffin Health Corporation, Waterbury Hospital, Griffin Family Physicians and others
United States of America v. Sokol
as 23-6428
Not Yet Classified:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
NICHOLAS SOKOL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03661
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
