US District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma Labor Cases
Cases 81 - 90 of 223
Watkins v. Greg's Automotive
as 4:2017cv00094
Plaintiff:
Justin Wayne Watkins
Defendant:
Greg's Automotive
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Gundrum et al v. Cleveland Integrity Services, Inc.
as 4:2017cv00055
Plaintiff:
Eric Gundrum and Michael King
Defendant:
Cleveland Integrity Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Johnson v. Magna Health Care, Inc.
as 4:2016cv00568
Plaintiff:
Terry Johnson
Defendant:
Magna Health Care, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Kirven et al v. Independent School District No. 33 of Creek County, Oklahoma
as 4:2016cv00478
Plaintiff:
Trant Kirven and Christopher Boone
Defendant:
Independent School District No. 33 of Creek County, Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Arnold v. Genghis Grill et al
as 4:2016cv00328
Plaintiff:
Courtnie Arnold
Defendant:
Genghis Grill, Genghis Grill International, LLC, Genghis Grill Franchise Concepts, LP and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Goodly v. Check-6, Inc. et al
as 4:2016cv00334
Plaintiff:
Joseph Goodly
Defendant:
Check-6, Inc. , Yarema Sos , Brian Brurud and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Burris v. Dresser-Rand Company
as 4:2016cv00198
Plaintiff:
Benita K Burris
Defendant:
Dresser-Rand Company
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Toone v. Ted's Cafe Escondido Holdings, Inc. et al
as 4:2015cv00715
Plaintiff:
Doug Toone
Defendant:
Ted's Cafe Escondido Holdings, Inc. , No Mas, Inc. and TCE V LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Voils et al v. Parker Plastics, Inc.
as 4:2015cv00691
Plaintiff:
James Voils , Gary Huffman , Pamela Crossno and others
Defendant:
Parker Plastics, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Salazar v. Chuy's OPCO, Inc. et al
as 4:2015cv00651
Plaintiff:
Samuel A Salazar
Defendant:
Chuy's OPCO, Inc. and Chuy's Holdings, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
