Cases 91 - 100 of 137
Assa'ad-Faltas v. Richland County Sheriffs Department et al
as 3:2013cv01629
Plaintiff:
Marie Assa'ad-Faltas
Defendant:
Richland County Sheriffs Department, Leon Lott, Jeanette McBride and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Chieves v. United States District Court et al
as 3:2013cv01152
Plaintiff:
Darrine Chieves
Defendant:
United States District Court, Richland County and FBI Agency
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Marie Assa'ad-Faltas v. Jean Toal
as 13-1524
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARIE THERESE ASSA'AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH
Defendant - Appellee:
JEAN TOAL, as administratice head of all SC's state courts and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief, DANIEL EDWARD SHEAROUSE, as Clerk of SC's Supreme Court and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief, MARK KEEL, as Chief of SC's State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief and others
Marie Assa'ad-Faltas v. Jean Toal
as 13-1489
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARIE THERESE ASSA'AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH
Defendant - Appellee:
JEAN TOAL, as administratice head of all SC's state courts and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief, DANIEL EDWARD SHEAROUSE, as Clerk of SC's Supreme Court and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief, MARK KEEL, as Chief of SC's State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2013cv00647
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2013cv00420
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Marie Assa'ad-Faltas v. South Carolina, State of
as 13-1034
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARIE THERESE ASSA'AD-FALTAS, MD MPH for herself and qui tam and Ex Rel the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt (Egypt) and as founder and first member of Doctors Against Drunk Drivers (DADD); Orthodox Christians Against Executions (OCAE); Sojourners
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, all solely officially and solely for injunctive and qui tam relief, NIMRATA HALEY, as SC's Governor; all solely officially and solely for injunctive and qui tam relief, ALAN WILSON, as SC's Attorney General; all solely officially and solely for injunctive and qui tam relief and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv03569
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
Kenneth Mitchell v. Lieutenant Bolin
as 12-8088
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KENNETH RAY MITCHELL
Defendant - Appellee:
LIEUTENANT BOLIN, Sheriff Dept Richland Co, LOTT LEON, SC, All ECT and others
Defendant:
SHERIFF OF RICHLAND COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA, THE STATE OF, SHERIFF AS DEPUTY SOLICITOR AGSSCT and others
Marie Assa'ad-Faltas v. Jean Toal
as 12-2326
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARIE THERESE ASSA'AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH
Defendant - Appellee:
JEAN TOAL, as administratice head of all SC's state courts and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief, DANIEL EDWARD SHEAROUSE, as Clerk of SC's Supreme Court and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief, MARK KEEL, as Chief of SC's State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) and all their subordinates who intend to injure Plaintiff, all solely officially and solely for injunctive relief and others
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.
