Cases 1 - 10 of 133
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00203
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
Alfred v. Duhe et al
as 6:2024cv00274
Plaintiff:
Tayjha Alfred
Defendant:
Bo Duhe and Alister Charrier
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00106
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Jackson v. Duff et al
as 3:2023cv03095
Plaintiff:
Debra Mays Jackson
Defendant:
Tom Duff, Steven Cunningham, Bruce Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Sex Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv02461
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-10734
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Tovar et al v. City of San Antonio
as 5:2023cv00847
Plaintiff:
Alexis Tovar and Phillip Reyes
Defendant:
City of San Antonio, Alfred Flores, Eleazar Alejandro and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-10569
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv01562
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BAP)
Locke v. Rivera
as 23-40208
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Nelson A. Locke
Defendant / Appellee:
Augustin Rivera, Jr., in his official capacity as Chairman of the Texas Board of Law Examiners, Teresa Ereon Giltner, in her official capacity as Vice Chairman of the Texas Board of Law Examiners, Harold Odom, in his official capacity as Member of the Texas Board of Law Examiners 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.
