Cases 1 - 10 of 31
SCOTT et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2023cv18957
Plaintiff:
EDDIE R. SCOTT and THE ESTATE OF ELOISE THOMAS SCOTT
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC., LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC and others
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
SCOTT v. DOE
as 1:2020cv08835
Plaintiff:
Thomas Scott
Defendant:
John Doe
In Re:
VALSARTAN LOSARTAN AND IRBESARTAN PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SCOTT v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2020cv02743
Plaintiff:
THOMAS SCOTT
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
ORKOWSKI v. MCCAULEY et al
as 2:2019cv02087
Defendant:
ROBERT A. LEIPZIGER, BRISTOL TOWNSHIP SEWER DEPARTMENT, RANDALL C. FLAGER and others
Plaintiff:
LUDWIG ORKOWSKI
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GRACE LAND II, LLC et al v. BRISTOL TOWNSHIP et al
as 2:2018cv05413
Defendant:
WILLIAM J. MCCAULEY, III, BRISTOL TOWNSHIP ZONING HEARING BOARD, BRISTOL TOWNSHIP and others
Plaintiff:
NEW FREEDOM BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, LLC and GRACE LAND II, LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DRASS v. GARMAN et al
as 3:2016cv00166
Petitioner:
THOMAS SCOTT DRASS
Respondent:
MARK GARMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BLAIR COUNTY, PA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv03163
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Thomas Scott v. McBride, et al
as 16-1287
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS SCOTT
Defendant - Appellee:
C/O MCBRIDE
REID-DOUGLAS et al v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2015cv00533
Plaintiff:
STEVEN REID-DOUGLAS, THOMAS SCOTT and DALIYL MUHAMMAD
Defendant:
JOHN WETZEL , JAMES BARNACLE , DAVID PITKINS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
