Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Riley v. United States Bankruptcy Court et al
as 3:2022cv00409
Plaintiff:
Charles Riley
Defendant:
United States Bankruptcy Court, Hon. David R. Duncan, Bruce M. Rose and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Martin v. Department of Social Services et al
as 3:2019cv00806
Plaintiff:
Randolph Martin
Defendant:
Contractor Kershaw County Enforcement, Contractor Janet C. Hasty, Contractor Kershaw County Family Court and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Martin v. Florence County Sheriff's Department et al
as 4:2018cv03332
Defendant:
Florence County Sheriff's Department and Deputy Sullivan
Plaintiff:
Randolph Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1982
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv00338
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
von Fox v. Waid
as 2:2016cv00181
Plaintiff:
Glynndeavin von Fox
Defendant:
L Randolph Waid
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Cole v. Montgomery et al
as 4:2014cv04462
Plaintiff:
Carolyn Cole
Defendant:
Gerald V Montgomery, Carolina Health Care Services, East Coast Protective Services and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2013cv01457
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv03535
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Randolph et al v. Turner et al
as 5:2012cv03087
Plaintiff:
Semaj Randolph and Lashonda Randolph
Defendant:
Harold Thad Turner , Keith Scharf , Orangeburg Department of Public Safety and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2011cv02339
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
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.
