Cases 1 - 10 of 75,671
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00940
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00679
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
KANTH v. PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
as 3:2024cv06848
Plaintiff:
DR. RAJANI KANTH
Defendant:
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
SANTIAGO v. PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BNI AGENT JONES BADGE 659 et al
as 2:2024cv02484
Plaintiff:
DAVID T. SANTIAGO
Defendant:
PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BNI AGENT JONES BADGE 659 and BNI AGENT JOHN/JANE DOE 1 - 10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02486
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02492
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02496
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02498
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv02477
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02493
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
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.
