US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina Labor Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 88
Peterson v. Harrah's NC Casino Company, LLC et al
as 1:2023cv00036
Plaintiff:
William Peterson, III
Defendant:
Harrah's NC Casino Company, LLC and Caesars Entertainment, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Richardson v. Optum Services, Inc. et al
as 3:2022cv00687
Plaintiff:
Jennifer Richardson
Defendant:
Optum Services, Inc. and UnitedHealth Group, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Ankrum v. Hope Haven, Inc.
as 3:2022cv00686
Plaintiff:
Antoine Ankrum
Defendant:
Hope Haven, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Walling v. Madison Health and Rehabilitation
as 1:2022cv00270
Plaintiff:
Tasha Walling
Defendant:
Madison Health and Rehabilitation
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Jordan v. Hope Haven, Inc.
as 3:2022cv00640
Plaintiff:
Jacqueline L. Jordan
Defendant:
Hope Haven, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Haley v. Industry Nine, LLC
as 1:2022cv00113
Plaintiff:
Joe Haley
Defendant:
Industry Nine, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Baker v. American & Efird LLC
as 3:2022cv00217
Plaintiff:
Jessica A. Baker
Defendant:
American & Efird LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Frisby v. Madison County
as 1:2022cv00064
Plaintiff:
Iva Frisby
Defendant:
Madison County
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Ortiz v. American Airlines, Inc.
as 3:2022cv00024
Plaintiff:
Madeline Ortiz
Defendant:
American Airlines, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave Act
Garrett v. Sephora USA, Inc.
as 3:2022cv00022
Plaintiff:
Monica Garrett
Defendant:
Sephora USA, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family & Medical Leave 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.
