Cases 11 - 20 of 23
Shophar v. Kansas Department of Children and Families
as 2:2018cv11567
Petitioner:
Jorel Shophar
Respondent:
Kansas Department of Children and Families and Johnson County Kansas District Court Division 10
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv00033
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Shophar et al v. Gorski et al
as 2:2017cv13322
Plaintiff:
Jorel Shophar, J.S. and B.S.
Defendant:
Carol Gorski, Annette Zsenyuk, Christina Gyllenborg and others
Dowell v. Johnson County, Tennessee et al
as 2:2012cv00148
Plaintiff:
Sabrina Dowell
Defendant:
Johnson County, Tennessee, Michael Reece, Joe Woodward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lassiter et al v. White et al
as 2:2011cv00362
Plaintiff:
Tammy Jerelene Lassiter and Benny Joe Cornell
Defendant:
Larry Potter, Mike Reece, Patrick White and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Taylor et al v. Dunn et al
as 2:2011cv00162
Plaintiff:
Daniel Hubert Taylor and Carolyn Sue Taylor
Defendant:
Amy Dunn, Barbara Hathaway, Johnson County, Tennessee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Osborne et al v. Reece et al
as 2:2011cv00135
Plaintiff:
Jessica Osborne , Brandon Osborne , Vicki Phillips and others
Defendant:
Mike Reece, Starling McCloud, Adam Guinn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Taylor et al v. Johnson County, Tennessee et al
as 2:2011cv00029
Plaintiff:
Daniel Hubert Taylor and Carolyn Sue Taylor
Defendant:
Johnson County, Tennessee, Michael Reece, Edward Taylor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stewart v. Johnson County, TN
as 2:2011cv00012
Plaintiff:
Ralph Stewart
Defendant:
Johnson County, TN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv00011
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
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.
