Cases 1 - 10 of 17,692
Evans v. Johnson City et al
as 2:2024cv00106
Plaintiff:
Mikayla Evans
Defendant:
Johnson City, Karl Turner, Kevin Peters and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00107
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
v. Brock et al
as 1:2024cv00198
Defendant:
Shirley D Brock, City of Chattanooga, University of Tennessee Chattanooga and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Brock et al v. City of Chattanooga et al
as 1:2024cv00199
Plaintiff:
Shirley D Brock and Ginger Yates
Defendant:
City of Chattanooga and University of Tennessee Chattanooga
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Brock v. Yates et al
as 1:2024cv00200
Plaintiff:
Shirley D Brock
Defendant:
Ginger Yates, City of Chattanooga and Officer Madison
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
v. Shelby County Sheriff
as 2:2024cv02422
Defendant:
Shelby Cty. Sheriff Shelby County Sheriff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Mechanical Contractors Association of Memphis, Inc. v. Shelby County, TN et al
as 2:2024cv02420
Plaintiff:
Mechanical Contractors Association of Memphis, Inc.
Defendant:
Shelby County, TN, Lee A Harris and Shep Wilbun
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Brown
as 2:2024cv02423
Petitioner:
Theotis Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00269
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12117 Americans with Disabilities Act
Moore v. Komatsu America Corp. et al
as 2:2024cv02419
Plaintiff:
Darrin Moore
Defendant:
Komatsu America Corp. and Amber Pugh
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
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.
