Third Circuit Labor Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 1,657
NASH, JR. v. SOHO STUDIO, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv06016
Plaintiff:
LARRY NASH, JR.
Defendant:
SOHO STUDIO, LLC and JOHN DOES 1-5 and 6-10
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
PORRECA v. HYBRIDGE LEARNING GROUP LLC
as 3:2024cv06011
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY PORRECA
Defendant:
HYBRIDGE LEARNING GROUP LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
GIANNATTASIO v. AMEDISYS HOLDING, LLC et al
as 3:2024cv05854
Plaintiff:
TARRA GIANNATTASIO
Defendant:
AMEDISYS HOLDING, LLC, JOHN DOES (1-5) and ABC CORP (6-10)
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
GIAGNACOVA v. 21ST CENTURY CYBER CHARTER SCHOOL et al
as 2:2024cv01877
Plaintiff:
NANCY GIAGNACOVA
Defendant:
21ST CENTURY CYBER CHARTER SCHOOL and Dr. Matthew Flannery
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Act of 1993
MARSHALL v. EVESHAM TOWNSHIP SCHOOL DISTRICT et al
as 1:2024cv05186
Plaintiff:
ERIC MARSHALL
Defendant:
Evesham Township School District and RICHARD DANTINNE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
CURTIS v. COMHAR, INC.
as 2:2024cv01541
Plaintiff:
BRITTNEY CURTIS
Defendant:
COMHAR, INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Act of 1993
DIAZ v. AMAZON, INC.
as 3:2024cv04883
Plaintiff:
Jermaine Diaz
Defendant:
AMAZON.COM SERVICES INC and AMAZON, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal- Labor/Mgmnt. Relatio
FENG v. METLIFE GROUP et al
as 2:2024cv04830
Plaintiff:
RACHEL FENG
Defendant:
METLIFE GROUP, DONALD SVODOBA and JUSTIN BESSPIATA
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
RIGGINS v. WOODSTOWN-PILESGROVE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT et al
as 1:2024cv04782
Plaintiff:
JOHANNA RIGGINS
Defendant:
WOODSTOWN-PILESGROVE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, JOHN 1-5 AND 6-10 DOES and JOHN DOES 1-5 AND 6-10
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave 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.
