Cases 21 - 30 of 54
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2017cv01365
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
United States of America v. Pierce et al
as 4:2016cv00588
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Tammy Annette Pierce and Frank William Pierce
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv06823
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00752
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00752
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Brashear v. Tulsa County Board of County Commissioners et al
as 4:2015cv00473
Plaintiff:
John Allen Brashear
Defendant:
Tulsa County Board of County Commissioners , Stanley Glanz , William Pierce and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv00134
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12188 Americans With Disabilities Act
William Pierce v. David Pitkins, et al
as 12-4332
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM PIERCE
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID PITKINS, SCI Laurel Highlands, ANNETTE KOWALESKI, C.H.C.A. SCI Laurel Highlands, R.D. MASON, Physical Therapy Supervisor and others
William Pierce v. David Pitkins, et al
as 12-4083
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM PIERCE
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID PITKINS, SCI Laurel Highlands, ANNETTE KOWALESKI, C.H.C.A. SCI Laurel Highlands, R.D. MASON, Physical Therapy Supervisor and others
Pierce v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals U S A Inc et al
as 6:2012cv00962
Plaintiff:
William Pierce
Defendant:
Takeda Pharmaceuticals U S A Inc , Takeda Pharmaceutical Co Ltd , Takeda Pharmaceuticals L L C and others
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.
