Cases 111 - 120 of 2,593
Clark v. Blue Care Network of Michigan
as 2:2022cv13016
Plaintiff:
Indeiria Clark
Defendant:
Blue Care Network of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan Doing business as BCN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Thompson v. Diversey, Inc.
as 2:2022cv00151
Plaintiff:
Brandon Thompson
Defendant:
Diversey, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
Custer v. Google LLC
as 3:2023cv00015
Plaintiff:
Adam Custer
Defendant:
Google LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Sedric Ward v. Shelby County, TN
as 22-6054
Plaintiff / Appellee:
SEDRIC WARD
Defendant / Appellant:
SHELBY COUNTY, TN
Foreman v. Eastman Schwartz Building, LLC
as 3:2022cv02175
Plaintiff:
George Foreman, Jr.
Defendant:
Eastman Schwartz Building, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Matthew Denholm v. ADT, LLC
as 22-6116
Not Yet Classified:
MATTHEW T. DENHOLM, Regional Director of the Ninth Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board and ADT, LLC
Matthew Denholm v. ADT, LLC
as 22-6115
Not Yet Classified:
MATTHEW T. DENHOLM, Regional Director of the Ninth Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board and ADT, LLC
Nelson v. Detroit Tigers, Inc.
as 2:2022cv12822
Plaintiff:
John G. Nelson
Defendant:
Detroit Tigers, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Burzan v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan
as 4:2022cv12900
Plaintiff:
Jamie Burzan
Defendant:
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Heilman v. Pandrol, Inc. et al
as 3:2022cv02132
Plaintiff:
Daniel Heilman
Defendant:
Pandrol, Inc. and Pandrol USA, LP
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
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.
