US District Court for the Northern District of Florida Civil Rights Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 3,118
JONES v. UNITED STATES
as 1:2024cv00054
Plaintiff:
CHARLES ANTHONY JONES
Defendant:
UNITED STATES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
FOY v. FLORIDA COMMISSION ON OFFENDER REVIEW et al
as 4:2024cv00140
Plaintiff:
TEENA FOY
Defendant:
FLORIDA COMMISSION ON OFFENDER REVIEW and MELINDA N COONROD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
WRIGHT v. LEO
as 3:2024cv00126
Plaintiff:
LAVETTE M WRIGHT
Defendant:
MAXIE WILLIAM LEO, SR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
EVANS v. ARCH
as 3:2024cv00127
Plaintiff:
ROGER VON EVANS
Defendant:
CAREN L ARCH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LOPER v. VALENCIA et al
as 1:2024cv00051
Plaintiff:
GABRIEL LOPER
Defendant:
JOVANT VALENCIA, DEAN WATSON, CLINT ANDERSON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
FIGG et al v. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION et al
as 4:2024cv00129
Plaintiff:
LINDA FIGG, FIGG GROUP INC, FIGG BRIDGE INSPECTION INC and others
Defendant:
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION and HARI KALLA
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
THOMPSON v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE et al
as 4:2024cv00128
Plaintiff:
BRUCE THOMPSON
Defendant:
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, ACCOUNTING SERVICE CENTER, AMAZON.COM INC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
DILMORE v. CITY OF QUINCY
as 4:2024cv00127
Plaintiff:
STACY DILMORE
Defendant:
CITY OF QUINCY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
MCKENZIE v. REGIESTER
as 5:2024cv00057
Plaintiff:
TABITHA MCKENZIE
Defendant:
TIMOTHY REGIESTER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
OSBORNE v. MCCORMICK et al
as 3:2024cv00104
Plaintiff:
ALAN OSBORNE
Defendant:
CLAYTON ADKINSON and WILLIAM MCCORMICK
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.
