Cases 51 - 60 of 389
Hughes v. Forrest County, Mississippi et al
as 2:2023cv00035
Plaintiff:
James Hughes
Defendant:
Forrest County, Mississippi and John Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Upchurch v. Kanengiser et al
as 2:2023cv00028
Plaintiff:
Nevaeh Upchurch
Defendant:
Jedidiah Kanengiser, Petal School District and John Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Demus v. City of Gulfport, MS et al
as 3:2023cv00105
Plaintiff:
Timothy J. Demus
Defendant:
City of Gulfport, MS, Gulfport Police Department, Unknown Gulfport Police Officers 1-5 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv00078
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00703
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Bennett v. Young et al
as 3:2022cv00705
Plaintiff:
Tim Bennett
Defendant:
Ken Young and John Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Alexander v. Dominos Pizza et al
as 3:2022cv00226
Plaintiff:
Chad Alexander
Defendant:
Dominos Pizza, Davis Pizza Enterprises, Brett Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Katzovicz v. Great Wolfe Express et al
as 4:2022cv03239
Plaintiff:
Samuel Katzovicz, II
Defendant:
Great Wolfe Express, Wan Xing, Wang Ping and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00247
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
Samuel et al v. City of Houston, Texas et al
as 4:2022cv02900
Plaintiff:
Delores Samuel, Kyle Samuel and Maya Thorn
Defendant:
Tx. City Of Houston, K Drey, John Does 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
