Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Randall v. Claycosky et al
as 1:2024cv01360
Plaintiff:
Ryan Randall
Defendant:
E. Claycosky, E. Wong, Owner of Dimensions Shop and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Wong v. City of Gaithersburg
as 8:2024cv00883
Plaintiff:
Qing Wong
Defendant:
City of Gaithersburg
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Jones v. McDonough et al
as 8:2024cv00390
Plaintiff:
Terris R. Jones, Sr.
Defendant:
Denis McDonough, George M. Morris, Jennifer White and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-2138
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00485
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
WONG et al v. GUILFORD COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT et al
as 1:2023cv00223
Plaintiff:
GERALD L. WONG and SUSAN H. WONG
Defendant:
GUILFORD COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, JAMES JOHN WINIARSKI, S. JENKINS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Waiters v. Richards et al
as 1:2019cv00831
Defendant:
Detective Loesch, Detective Carpenter, David Burkholder and others
Plaintiff:
Mario Laven Waiters
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eugenna Taylor v. University of Maryland
as 15-2492
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EUGENNA AILEEN TAYLOR
Defendant - Appellee:
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, DENNY'S, INCORPORATED, TIMOTHY WONG and others
Taylor v. University of Maryland et al
as 1:2015cv03113
Plaintiff:
Eugenna Aileen Taylor
Defendant:
University of Maryland, Denny's, Inc., Timothy Wong and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv00074
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
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.
