Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Emrit v. Barkley et al
as 1:2023cv00027
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emrit
Defendant:
Charles Barkley, Subway and Fanduel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Interstate Commerce Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00017
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Emrit v. Barkley et al
as 2:2023cv00019
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emrit
Defendant:
Charles Barkley, Subway and Fanduel Sporting Goods
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
Emrit v. Barkley et al
as 1:2023cv00003
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emit and Ronald Satish Emrit
Defendant:
Charles Barkley, Subway, Fandvel and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Smith v. Subway Inc. et al (MAG+)
as 2:2022cv00479
Plaintiff:
Peter J. Smith
Defendant:
Subway Inc., RSA Union Building and Mike Campbell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv00849
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Goncalves v. Rock Enterprises USA, Inc. et al
as 1:2019cv00933
Defendant:
Rock Enterprises USA, Inc., Martha Robeen, JRH & Associates, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Laura Goncalves
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Smith v. Subway Inc. et al (MAG+)
as 2:2019cv00592
Plaintiff:
Peter J. Smith
Defendant:
Retirement Systems of Alabama, Subway Inc., RSA Security and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murphy v. SES of Montgomery, LLC et al (MAG+)
as 2:2018cv00815
Defendant:
William R. Hudson, II, SES of Montgomery, LLC, Subway and others
Plaintiff:
Rodney J. Murphy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Guerrier v. Madison County District Attorney's Office et al
as 5:2015cv02260
Plaintiff:
Dorothy Guerrier
Defendant:
Madison County District Attorney's Office, P Mark Sandlin, Rebekah A Callahan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
