Cases 1 - 10 of 6,355
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2025cv00454
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 623 Job Discrimination (Age)
Merritt v. Snyder
as 3:2025cv00061
Defendant:
Adam Snyder
Plaintiff:
Katie Merritt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2025cv00263
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Joseph D Gilberti v. David Mayer de Rothschild et al
as 2:2025cv00355
Plaintiff:
Joseph D. Gilberti
Defendant:
David Mayer de Rothschild, James Amschel Victor Rothschild, Nicholas David Rothschild and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Essak v. Oakland County Sheriff's Department et al
as 2:2025cv10053
Defendant:
John Doe, Snyder, Highland Township Sub-Station and others
Plaintiff:
Rhonda Essak
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Quiero, Jr. v. Stiltner et al
as 7:2025cv00013
Defendant:
Sgt. Scott, John Doe #4, John Doe #3 and others
Plaintiff:
Avon Constantino Quiero, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Snyder v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2025cv00006
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff:
Jamie Nicole Snyder
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Pimentel v. Charleston County et al
as 9:2025cv00031
Plaintiff:
Robert Samuel Pimentel
Defendant:
Charleston County, Snyder and Gorden
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
KANABLE v. ALLEN et al
as 1:2024cv02289
Defendant:
T. DAVIS, K. GILMORE, RICHARD BROWN and others
Plaintiff:
KRISTOPHER KANABLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GRIVAS v. SORACE et al
as 5:2024cv06923
Defendant:
RANDY KING, DANENE SORACE, THE CITY OF LANCASTER and others
Plaintiff:
IRENE GRIVAS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
