Cases 1 - 10 of 30
Clark v. State of Connecticut et al
as 3:2022cv01314
Plaintiff:
Gordon Clark
Defendant:
State of Connecticut, Ned Lamont, William Tong and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Cameron v. Stebbins et al
as 3:2021cv00165
Defendant:
Stephen Samson, Enfield Police Dept., State of Connecticut and others
Plaintiff:
Marcus Cameron
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2019cv01907
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2019cv01592
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Town of Enfield v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al
as 1:2019op45581
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation, Purdue Pharma L.P., Mallinckrodt LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Town of Enfield
Enfield v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al
as 3:2019cv00789
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation, Purdue Pharma L.P., Mallinckrodt LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Town of Enfield
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Ward v. Enfield
as 18-2195
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Patrick Joseph Ward
Defendant:
Enfield Police Dept., Carl Seferrazza, Chief, individually and in his official capacity, John Carney, Sergeant, individually and in his official capacity and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Town of Enfield and Michael Emons, Officer, individually and in his official capacity
Demers et al v. Enfield et al
as 3:2016cv01354
Plaintiff:
Daniel Demers and Edith Mandujano-Demers
Defendant:
Town of Enfield, Carl Sferrazza, Kevin Ragion and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
v. Town of Enfield et al
as 3:2016cv01303
Defendant:
Town of Enfield, Carl Sferrazza, Kevin Ragion and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
New Horizons Communications Corporation v. Enfield
as 3:2016cv01279
Plaintiff:
New Horizons Communications Corporation
Defendant:
Town of Enfield
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
