Cases 41 - 50 of 259
Folmar v. State of Ohio Human Resource Dept. et al
as 2:2021cv05427
Plaintiff:
Ian L Folmar
Defendant:
State of Ohio Human Resource Dept., Commissioners Office City of Columbus, Franklin County, Judge Ted Barrows and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv02194
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2021cv12588
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01980
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Washington v. Vendor Resource Management et al
as 3:2021cv00262
Plaintiff:
James E Washington
Defendant:
Vendor Resource Management, Department of Veterans Administration, Raine & Company LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01791
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12131 Americans with Disabilities
Tuovila v. Michigan Department of Natural Resources
as 2:2021cv00197
Plaintiff:
Stephen J. Tuovila
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv00481
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
Florian et al v. Michigan Department of Natural Resources et al
as 1:2021cv00265
Defendant:
GERALD THAYER and Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Plaintiff:
JOHN J. FLORIAN, MARC D. FLORIAN and DANA L. WAGEMAKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Grindle et al v. Daughtery et al
as 3:2021cv00038
Plaintiff:
Michael Wade Grindle and Charles Schuiten
Defendant:
Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency and Bradley Daughtery
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
