Alabama Civil Rights Cases
Cases 41 - 50 of 17,946
Mathis v. Curtis et al (MAG+)
as 1:2024cv00726
Defendant:
Ken Curtis and Gray Television Licensee LLC
Plaintiff:
Nathan Mathis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Curry v. Window World of Central Alabama Inc
as 2:2024cv01535
Plaintiff:
Saidah Curry
Defendant:
Window World of Central Alabama Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Lizut v. Toyota Motor Manufacturing Alabama Inc
as 5:2024cv01536
Defendant:
Toyota Motor Manufacturing Alabama Inc
Plaintiff:
Keith Lizut
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12117 ad - Americans with Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01528
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01530
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01519
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01521
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01524
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Asher v. URRESTA et al
as 2:2024cv01514
Plaintiff:
Wilek Abraham Bey Emperor Asher
Defendant:
State of Alabama, Irondale Police Department and URRESTA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Williams v. Little et al (MAG+)
as 3:2024cv00712
Defendant:
Dilipkumar Patel, Michael Nolan, Michael Porter and others
Plaintiff:
Leroy Williams, Jr.
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.
