Cases 11 - 20 of 4,975
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00126
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv01200
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv11175
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
John Doe, et al v. City of Boston, et al
as 24-1419
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOE, JANE DOE and JAMES DOE
Defendant:
BOSTON, MA, PAUL EVANS, individually, ROBERT DUNFORD, individually and others
Brum v. Town of Bristol et al
as 1:2024cv00169
Plaintiff:
Michael Brum
Defendant:
Town of Bristol, Bristol Police Department, John Does and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Simon et al v. Aerostar Airport Holdings, LLC et al
as 3:2024cv01196
Plaintiff:
Sandra Kay Simon, Kalman Glenn Simon, Conjugal Partnership Simon-Simon and others
Defendant:
Aerostar Airport Holdings, LLC, Prime Janitorial Service, Corp, Mapfre Praico Insurance Company and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv11134
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
as 1:2024cv11099
Plaintiff:
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC
Defendant:
John Doe
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC et al v. Doe
as 1:2024cv11083
Plaintiff:
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC
Defendant:
John Doe
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
as 1:2024cv11085
Plaintiff:
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC
Defendant:
John Doe
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
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.
