Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Wright v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc et al
as 3:2022cv00698
Plaintiff:
Warren Wright
Defendant:
DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Depuy Inc., DePuy International Limited and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Barber v. Burnett et al.
as 1:2020cv02611
Plaintiff:
Charles Barber
Defendant:
Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS), Oluwasegun Fashae, Philipe Jordan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Barber v. Okafor et al
as 8:2018cv00021
Plaintiff:
Charles L. Barber
Defendant:
Emeka Okafor, Tanyeal Goode, Michael Gaskins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wright v. Velocity Express, LLC et al
as 3:2014cv00751
Defendant:
Dynamex, Inc., Transforce, Inc. and Velocity Express, LLC
Plaintiff:
Warren Wright, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Wright et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc.
as 2:2013cv25002
Plaintiff:
Brenda Wright and Warren Wright
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
WRIGHT v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2011cv06846
Petitioner:
WARREN WRIGHT
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
FIRST AMERICAN MARKETING CORPORATION v. WRIGHT
as 2:2011cv06129
Plaintiff:
FIRST AMERICAN MARKETING CORPORATION
Defendant:
WARREN WRIGHT
Counter_claimant:
WARREN WRIGHT
Counter_defendant:
FIRST AMERICAN MARKETING CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Wright v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc et al
as 3:2011cv02534
Plaintiff:
Warren Wright
Defendant:
DePuy Orthopaedics Inc , DePuy Inc , DePuy International Limited and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CHASE et al v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2011cv05608
Petitioner:
RONALD CHASE, RODNEY BANKHEAD, SYVLAN HAYNES and others
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
