US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Civil Rights Cases
Cases 81 - 90 of 27,048
MUHAMMAD v. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS (NAR) et al
as 5:2024cv05543
Defendant:
GREATER LEHIGH VALLEY MULTIPLE LISTING SERVICE (GLVMLS), NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS (NAR) and PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS (PAR)
Plaintiff:
MAURICE MUHAMMAD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv05497
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv05501
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv05506
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 623 Job Discrimination (Age)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv05496
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
KOVALEV v. Wakefield et al
as 2:2024cv05474
Plaintiff:
SERGEI KOVALEV
Defendant:
JOHN DOES 1-5 and Steven A. Wakefield
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
THOMPSON v. PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT et al
as 2:2024cv05491
Defendant:
POLICE OFFICER 2, PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPT and POLICE OFFICER 1
Plaintiff:
GREGORY ROBERT THOMPSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
JAMES et al v. PHILADELPHIA FAMILY COURT, DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISIONS et al
as 2:2024cv05490
Defendant:
BETSY WAHL, SHAWN T. HAGERTY, HOLLY J. FORD and others
Plaintiff:
DURON JAMES and COPYRIGHT #00086731-1
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
IN RE: JORDAN
as 2:2024cv05452
Plaintiff:
DOMINIQUE JORDAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
IN RE: TELL
as 2:2024cv05550
Unknown:
SIR JOSEPH JAY ROGER TELL
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.