Cases 1 - 10 of 10
HURSTON v. INDIANA GAMING COMPANY LLC
as 1:2019cv04890
Defendant:
INDIANA GAMING COMPANY LLC, DOES I THROUGH X INCLUSIVE, ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES I THROUGH X, INCLUSIVE and others
Plaintiff:
MIRACLE HURSTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
POINTER et al v. LAWSON, ET AL
as 1:2019cv03758
Defendant:
OFFICER ROBERT LAWSON, ROBERT LAWSON, JANE DOE and others
Plaintiff:
DANIELLE POINTER, A. W. and D. P.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NEAFUS v. COX et al
as 1:2018cv02144
Defendant:
JOHNSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, SHERIFF DOUG COX, DEPUTY SHERIFF RICHARD ROE I and others
Plaintiff:
STEVEN NEAFUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv02790
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 701 Vocational Rehabilitation
MANCINI et al v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS et al
as 1:2016cv02048
Plaintiff:
K. C. and MARA MANCINI
Defendant:
CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, DOES 1-50, DEBRA DOTSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv01696
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act
MAN v. SWALLERS et al
as 1:2015cv01593
Defendant:
SARAH EVANS BARKER, BRIAN BURNETT, DAVID J. CERTO and others
Plaintiff:
MAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CAMM v. FAITH et al
as 4:2014cv00123
Defendant:
JAMES BIDDLE, SEAN CLEMONS, RODNEY ENGLERT and others
Plaintiff:
DAVID R. CAMM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv00555
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
R. v. WILLIAM PENN ELEMENTARY #49 et al
as 1:2010cv00535
Defendant:
RHONDA AKERS, JANE DOE, INDIANAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS and others
Plaintiff:
J. R.
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.
