Cases 41 - 50 of 50
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv00683
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
WAGNER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2008cv01913
Petitioner:
LAMONT A. WAGNER
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RUSSELL A. ELIASON and N. CARLTON TILLERY
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
HADDEN v. VADEN
as 1:2008mc00633
Petitioner:
CARLTON M. HADDEN
Respondent:
ELIZABETH VADEN
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Plaintiff
ADAMS et al v. SCHAFER
as 1:2008cv00919
Plaintiff:
LINDA ADAMS, WILLIE E. ADAMS, SHIRLEY ALEXANDER and others
Defendant:
ED SCHAFER
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv02227
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv02171
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
IN RE SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM TO CARLTON EDWARDS
as 1:2007mc00291
Petitioner:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Respondent:
CARLTON EDWARDS
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
LUCAS v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al
as 1:2007cv01109
Plaintiff:
SHANE LUCAS and SHANE LUCAS
Defendant:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CARLTON B. WICKER, JEFFERY CLAY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HARRIS v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION et al
as 1:2007cv00893
Petitioner:
CARLTON FRANCIS HARRIS
Respondent:
UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA and D. FONDREN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv00851
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
