Gough v. Louisville Jefferson County Metro Government et al

Defendant: Chauncey T. Carthan and Louisville Jefferson County Metro Government
Plaintiff: Ishmael Gough
Case Number: 3:2012cv00849
Filed: December 20, 2012
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Office: Louisville Office
County: Jefferson
Presiding Judge: Charles R. Simpson
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Both

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Kentucky Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gough v. Louisville Jefferson County Metro Government et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Chauncey T. Carthan
Represented By: Kent Wicker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Louisville Jefferson County Metro Government
Represented By: Lisa A. Schweickart
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ishmael Gough
Represented By: Derek Patrick O'Bryan
Represented By: James M. Bolus, Jr.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.