Cases 101 - 110 of 70,948
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00272
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
Doe #1 MLC et al v. Lee et al
as 3:2024cv00585
Plaintiff:
John Doe #1 (MKC) and John Doe #2 (JAS)
Defendant:
William B. Lee and David B. Rausch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Doe #066 v. Lee et al
as 3:2024cv00586
Plaintiff:
John Doe #066
Defendant:
William Lee and David Rausch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02348
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00845
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Daville v. Broussard et al
as 2:2024cv02354
Plaintiff:
Matthew Daville
Defendant:
TransCanada USA Services Inc. and Rixey Broussard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Helton v. Lee et al
as 3:2024cv00588
Plaintiff:
Ricky M. Helton
Defendant:
Governor Bill Lee and David Rausch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wright v. Sevier County, Tennessee et al
as 3:2024cv00220
Plaintiff:
Vickie Wright
Defendant:
Sevier County, Tennessee, Bart Tyner, Mark Hunter and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00273
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Shaw v. Memphis Police Department et al
as 2:2024cv02309
Plaintiff:
Tekeva Deshuna Shaw
Defendant:
Memphis Police Department, Memphis Police Internal Affairs Bureau, Tennessee Highway Patrol 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.
