Cases 31 - 40 of 1,787
Jones v. Rutherford County et al
as 3:2024cv00264
Plaintiff:
Leo Lamont Jones
Defendant:
Rutherford County and James Elliot
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00262
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00105
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Pendleton v. Kennedy et al
as 3:2024cv00252
Plaintiff:
Eric C. Pendleton
Defendant:
Randy Kennedy, Elizabeth A. Johnson, Andra Hedrick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jones v. Aludyne US LLC
as 3:2024cv00233
Plaintiff:
Arthur Jones
Defendant:
Aludyne US LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Ashley et al v. Jones et al
as 2:2024cv00011
Plaintiff:
Katherine Ann Ashley, Katelyn Phillips, Deannia Keith and others
Defendant:
Coltan Jones, Sheriff Michael Reagon and Fentress County
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 6851 Disclosure of Intimate Images
Jones v. Buttermilk Ranch, LLC
as 3:2024cv00165
Plaintiff:
Taylor Jones
Defendant:
Buttermilk Ranch, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Goodwin v. State of Tennessee et al
as 1:2024cv00061
Plaintiff:
Edgar Goodwin
Defendant:
State of Tennessee, Shian, Kitchen Staff and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Shelby County Criminal Justice Center
as 2:2024cv02100
Plaintiff:
Pierre M. Jones
Defendant:
Shelby County Criminal Justice Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Boylan v. Wardlaw et al
as 3:2024cv00039
Plaintiff:
Timothy T Boylan, Jr
Defendant:
Brandon D Wardlaw, Adam Barnett, Timothy Distasio and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
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.
