US District Court for the District of South Carolina Civil Rights Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 8,477
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv06107
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Henry v. Thompson
as 4:2023cv06113
Plaintiff:
Patrick Henry, III
Defendant:
Phillip E Thompson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Singletary v. Cramer et al
as 2:2023cv06086
Plaintiff:
John Singletary
Defendant:
Isaac Cramer, Keith Rossoen, Thomas James Lee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1973 - Voting Rights Act of 1965
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv06077
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv06090
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Scipio v. Finklea, Hendrick & Blake, LLC et al
as 4:2023cv06088
Plaintiff:
Eshawn Jessica Scipio
Defendant:
Finklea, Hendrick & Blake, LLC, Gary I. Finklea, Charlie Blake, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bey v. One 80 Place et al
as 2:2023cv06035
Plaintiff:
Azeez Sayfa-Al-Din Bey
Defendant:
One 80 Place, Hope Center and Neighborhood House Community Outreach
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv06059
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2023cv05974
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12117 Americans with Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 9:2023cv05934
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
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.
