US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina Labor Cases
Cases 41 - 50 of 106
KBRIUH v. STEPHENS PIPE & STEEL, LLC
as 1:2016cv00004
Plaintiff:
BAHSRUNH KBRIUH
Defendant:
STEPHENS PIPE & STEEL, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
TUCKER AUTO-MATION OF NORTH CAROLINA, LLC v. RUTLEDGE et al
as 1:2015cv00893
Plaintiff:
TUCKER AUTO-MATION OF NORTH CAROLINA, LLC
Defendant:
RUSSELL RUTLEDGE and RUTLEDGE COMMERCIAL, LLC
Cause Of Action: Diversity
HUTSON et al v. CAH ACQUISITION COMPANY 10, LLC et al
as 1:2015cv00742
Plaintiff:
CARRIE HUTSON , JEANNA SIMMONS and JENIFER SWANNER
Defendant:
CAH ACQUISITION COMPANY 10, LLC , HMC/CAH CONSOLIDATED, INC. and RURAL COMMUNITY HOSPITALS OF AMERICA, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2101
CHAPIN V. WILLIAMS INDUSTRIAL SERVICES, LLC
as 1:2015cv00438
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY CHAPIN
Defendant:
WILLIAMS INDUSTRIAL SERVICES, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 206
RYALS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2015cv00434
Plaintiff:
ROBERT RYALS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1985
DYMEK v. BOSTON HEART DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION
as 1:2015cv00289
Plaintiff:
STANLEY DYMEK
Defendant:
BOSTON HEART DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
AHMED v. VITACOST.COM, INC.
as 1:2015cv00036
Plaintiff:
AASMA AHMED
Defendant:
VITACOST.COM, INC.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
WALLER v. USA TACTICAL FIREARMS LLC
as 1:2014cv01040
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER WALLER
Defendant:
USA TACTICAL FIREARMS LLC
Counter_claimant:
USA TACTICAL FIREARMS LLC
Counter_defendant:
CHRISTOPHER WALLER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
BOWERS v. ACUCOTE, INC.
as 1:2014cv00815
Plaintiff:
LOGAN P. BOWERS
Defendant:
ACUCOTE, INC.
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 704
HUTCHENS V. MT. AIRY TIRE & AUTOMOTIVE, INC., et al
as 1:2014cv00713
Defendant:
MT. AIRY TIRE & AUTOMOTIVE, INC., STOKES TIRE & AUTOMOTIVE, INC., MOORESVILLE TIRE & AUTOMOTIVE, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
CHARLES HUTCHENS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12112
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.
