Cases 1 - 10 of 2,011
Fantel, Jr. v. State of Rhode Island et al
as 1:2024cv00220
Plaintiff:
Clifford John Fantel, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Rhode Island and Town of South Kingston
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00222
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Fantel, Jr. v. State of Rhode Island et al
as 1:2024cv00213
Plaintiff:
Clifford John Fantel, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Rhode Island and Town of South Kingstown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00211
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
USA v. City of Pawtucket, et al
as 1:2024cv00209
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
City of Pawtucket, Kenneth R. McGill, Maria M. Pavao and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Cronan v. Nerhona et al
as 1:2024cv00207
Plaintiff:
Laurie Cronan
Defendant:
Peter Nerhona, Daniel Ballirano, Kerry Travers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00204
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McGovern et al v. Bailey et al
as 1:2024cv00198
Plaintiff:
David M. McGovern and Local 1703 of the I.A.F.F.
Defendant:
William Bailey and Town of Tiverton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McGovern et al v. William et al
as 1:2024cv00197
Plaintiff:
David M. McGovern and Local 1703 of the I.A.F.F.
Defendant:
Bailey William and Town of Tiverton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McGovern et al v. Bailey et al
as 1:2024cv00199
Plaintiff:
David M. McGovern and Local 1703 of the I.A.F.F.
Defendant:
William Bailey, III and Town of Tiverton
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.
