Cases 11 - 20 of 172
Rietheimer v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
as 1:2023cv00477
Plaintiff:
Brandon Rietheimer
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 lr Diversity - Labor
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv00163
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Ballou, et al v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
as 23-3021
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL BALLOU, HENRY MARTINEZ, MATTHEW SPINNATO and others
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00839
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02799
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12111 - Americans With Disabilities Act - Employment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv02428
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Cyr v. Rodriguez et al
as 6:2022cv01209
Plaintiff:
Cassidy Cyr
Defendant:
Michael Thomas Rodriguez, Penske Truck Leasing Corporation and United Parcel Service, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Tort/Motor Vehicle (
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00625
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination
Terry v. 2037 Walnut Community Limited Liability Co. et al
as 1:2022cv02095
Plaintiff:
Jo Ann Terry and Curtis Terry
Defendant:
Fairfield Properties LP, 2037 Walnut Community LLC, United Parcel Service and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 3601 Fair Housing Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 22-3142
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
