Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv04974
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e-2e Job Discrimination (Unlawful Employment Practices)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv09391
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2018cv00135
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1400
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv03646
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
T.A. et al v. Leff et al
as 2:2017cv04291
Plaintiff:
P. A., T. A. and Regan Lally
Defendant:
Arent Fox, L.L.P., Robert J. Bergson, Esq., Best Real Estate Development, L.L.C. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv01807
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Wells Fargo, N.A. v. Stephens et al
as 3:2014cv01982
Plaintiff:
Wells Fargo N.A.
Defendant:
Maria L. Stephens, Reza Stephens and Quiet Hawk
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hawkes v. Egner et al
as 1:2013cv03560
Interested Party:
Office of Corporation Counsel
Defendant:
Police Officer Arthur Egner and John and Jane Doe 1 though 10
Plaintiff:
Dewayne Hawkes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Appel v. Spiridon
as 11-3799
Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant - Appellee:
Rosalie Appel
Defendant-Counter-Claimant - Appellant:
Linda Rinker, Charles P. Spiridon and Linda Vaden-Goad
Defendant-Counter-Claimant:
Carold Hawkes, Terry Wells, Margaret Grimes and others
Appel v. Spiridon et al
as 3:2007cv01237
Plaintiff:
Rosalie Appel
Defendant:
Charles P. Spiridon, Carol Hawkes, Terry Wells and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
