U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit Labor Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 212
Jong Lee v. Agape Health Management, Inc.
as 25-1001
Defendant:
AGAPE HEALTH MANAGEMENT, INC., DONG CHUL CHOI and SUN OK LEE
Plaintiff:
JONG CHEON LEE
Hye Son v. Agape Health Management, Inc.
as 25-1002
Defendant:
DONG CHUL CHOI, AGAPE HEALTH MANAGEMENT, INC., JEONG EUI LEE and others
Plaintiff:
YOON JUNG YIM, SOONKUM PARK, YOON HEE OH and others
Alan Vara v. NPA Equity Investments, LLC
as 24-2251
Plaintiff:
ALAN N. VARA, ANA YANCI CENTENO MAJANO, MIGUEL A. CARDONA and others
Intervenor:
NPA EQULTY INVESTMENTS, LLC
Defendant:
EDGAR JIMENEZ, SKANKSA USA BUILDING INC., d/b/a Skanska, BROTHER'S MECHANICAL, INC. and others
Brahim Boumakh v. Michelle Reid
as 24-2185
Defendant:
DR. MICHELLE REID, Superintendent and JOHN R. LEWIS HIGH SCHOOL
Plaintiff:
BRAHIM BOUMAKH
DiStefano, Incorporated v. Tasty Baking Company
as 24-1926
Defendant:
TASTY BAKING COMPANY
Plaintiff:
DISTEFANO, INCORPORATED and DWAYNE DISTEFANO
Osvaldo Figueroa v. Butterball, LLC
as 24-1861
Defendant:
BUTTERBALL, LLC
Plaintiff:
OSVALDO FIGUEROA
Terry Steele v. Antony Blinken
as 24-1717
Defendant:
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Secretary of the United States Department of State
Plaintiff:
TERRY L. STEELE
Brenda Norman v. Encompass Health Rehabilitation Hospital
as 24-1690
Defendant:
ENCOMPASS HEALTH CORP. and ENCOMPASS HEALTH REHABILITATION HOSPITAL OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA, LLC
Plaintiff:
BRENDA L. NORMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and COLLEEN BOCKMAN
Ovis Canales v. OPW Fueling Components LLC
as 24-1579
Defendant:
OPW FUELING COMPONENTS LLC
Plaintiff:
OVIS MATAMOROS CANALES, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Samuel Whatley, II v. Bethany Phillips
as 24-1560
Plaintiff:
REVEREND DR. SAMUEL T. WHATLEY and SAMUEL T. WHATLEY, II
Defendant:
BETHANY PHILLIPS, General Manager, U-HAUL, AMERCO and others
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.
