Cases 11 - 20 of 509
TANNER v. FRENCH et al
as 3:2024cv00078
Plaintiff:
ALPHONSO TARODD TANNER
Defendant:
FRENCH, DIRECTOR CURRY, SKKRUBS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pritchett et al v. United Parcel Services Inc
as 2:2024cv00161
Plaintiff:
Cain Pritchett, Micheal Arnold, Bradley Barkley and others
Defendant:
United Parcel Services Inc
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00431
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Tabitha McKenzie v. Casey Barren, et al
as 24-10301
Plaintiff:
TABITHA MCKENZIE
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER PATTERSON, CASEY T. BARREN, LISA TANNER and others
Alphonso TannerIn re: Alphonso Tanner
as 24-10778
Petitioner:
In re: ALPHONSO TARODD TANNER
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Bouquet v. Tanner et al
as 0:2024cv60271
Plaintiff:
Jude Bouquet
Defendant:
Kirk Tanner and Wendy's CEO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
A. et al v. Carlson et al
as 1:2024cv00037
Plaintiff:
Isaac A., Zack B., Leon C. and others
Defendant:
Russel Carlson, Kevin Tanner and Candice L. Broce
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Tanner v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Orange County)
as 6:2024cv00186
Petitioner:
Alphonso Tarodd Tanner
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MCKENZIE v. PATTERSON et al
as 4:2023cv00470
Plaintiff:
TABITHA MCKENZIE
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER PATTERSON, CASEY T BARREN, BRITTNEY BAXTER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv00232
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 626 Job Discrimination (Age)
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.
