Cases 81 - 90 of 125
McCarrol Page v. Postmaster General
as 12-11747
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MCCARROL PAGE
Defendant - Appellee:
PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Postmaster General and Chief Executive Officer United States Postal Service
Zorc v. United States Postal Service
as 4:2012cv00080
Plaintiff:
Harriet Patricia Zorc
Defendant:
United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nanan v. Clayton County Police Department et al
as 1:2012cv00730
Plaintiff:
Mahabir Nanan
Defendant:
Clayton County Police Department, Clayton County Sheriff Department, Clayton County Animal Control and others
Movant:
Shennielle Shellie S Youhoing
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Youhoing et al v. Clayton County Police Department et al
as 1:2012cv00736
Plaintiff:
Shennielle Shelle Youhoing, Mahabir Nanan, Mohaberry D. Youhoing-Nanan and others
Defendant:
Clayton County Police Department, Clayton County Sheriff Department, Clayton County Animal Control and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cole v. Donahoe et al
as 3:2012cv00028
Plaintiff:
Vashti Cole
Defendant:
Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General and United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 11-14582
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011mc03261
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
PAGE v. DONAHOE
as 4:2011cv00423
Plaintiff:
MCCARROL PAGE
Defendant:
PATRICK R. DONAHOE, POSTMASTER GENERAL & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv00395
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 9:2011cv80709
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12182
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.
