Cases 51 - 60 of 17,715
Ford v. Fayette County, Tennessee et al
as 2:2024cv02405
Plaintiff:
Dr. fabre ford
Defendant:
Fayette County, Tennessee, Sheriff Bobby Riles, matthew salamon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00722
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00727
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Anderson v. Wendy's of Bowling Green Inc.
as 3:2024cv00500
Plaintiff:
Lonnita Anderson
Defendant:
Wendy's of Bowling Green Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00718
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Nitschke et al v. Berry Farms APT Investments, LP et al
as 3:2024cv00466
Plaintiff:
Chelsie Nitschke and Cynthia George
Defendant:
Berry Farms APT Investments, LP, DeAngelis Diamond Construction, LLC and Boyle Investment Company
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 3601 Fair Housing Act
Pondexter v. United Parcel Service
as 2:2024cv02399
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Pondexter
Defendant:
United Parcel Service
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Doe (PDB) v. Lee et al
as 3:2024cv00713
Plaintiff:
John Doe (PDB)
Defendant:
William B. Lee and David B. Rausch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00716
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Martin v. Putman et al
as 3:2024cv00711
Plaintiff:
Erwin D. Martin
Defendant:
Eric Putman, f/n/u Allen, Michael Jones and others
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.
