Cases 1 - 10 of 187
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00771
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Berryman v. Deluca et al
as 2:2024cv11038
Plaintiff:
Philip W. Berryman
Defendant:
Tiffany Deluca, Labron, George Stephenson and others
Braunskill v. Smith et al
as 1:2024cv00140
Plaintiff:
Ralphiell Braunskill
Defendant:
Agent Danielle Smith, Clermont Co. Sheriff Dept., Jane Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
King v. Accell Schools LLC
as 4:2023cv13308
Plaintiff:
Antonio King
Defendant:
Accell Schools LLC, Nicole Arnold and Pamela Farris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv13158
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Kellie Farris v. Oakland County, MI, et al
as 23-1739
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KELLIE FARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
OAKLAND COUNTY, MI, DEPUTY MARK BOWERING, DEPUTY ERIN VINCENT and others
Farris v. SSA
as 6:2023cv00124
Plaintiff:
James Edward Farris
Defendant:
Commissioner of SSA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Farris v. Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc. Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation
as 2:2023cv01778
Plaintiff:
James Farris
Defendant:
Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc. Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Burton v. Saph et al
as 2:2023cv11093
Plaintiff:
Jermaine Burton
Defendant:
Jay Saph, McCinnis, Kim Farris and others
Harris et al v. Wayne et al
as 2:2023cv10986
Plaintiff:
Nicole Harris, Blanca Arguelles, Amber Baldwin and others
Defendant:
Wayne, County of, Officer Terri Graham and Terri Graham
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.
