Cases 21 - 30 of 56
Locke v. City Of Chicago et al
as 1:2017cv05170
Plaintiff:
Tamara Locke
Defendant:
City Of Chicago and Dan Cojocnean
Movant:
Gregory E Kulis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tamara Loertscher v. Eloise Anderson, et al
as 17-1936
Plaintiff - Appellee:
TAMARA M. LOERTSCHER
Defendant - Appellant:
ELOISE ANDERSON and BRAD D. SCHIMEL
Tomas et al v. The Village of Lynwood et al
as 1:2017cv01064
Plaintiff:
Destinee Tomas and Tamara Jackson
Defendant:
The Village of Lynwood , Luke Tambrini and Dennis Suroviak
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Donyiel Anderson et al v. City of Chicago et al
as 1:2015cv11157
Plaintiff:
Donyiel Anderson and Hanna Walker
Defendant:
City of Chicago, Daniel O'Brien, William Murphy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tamara Skube v. Travis Koester
as 15-2869
Plaintiff - Appellee:
TAMARA SKUBE
Defendant - Appellant:
TRAVIS KOESTER, In His Individual and Official Capacities at the Sangamon County Sheriff's Office
Tamara Simic v. City of Chicago
as 15-2496
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TAMARA SIMIC
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF CHICAGO
Komoscar et al v. Pence et al
as 2:2015cv00256
Plaintiff:
Timothy J Komoscar and Kelly A Komoscar
Defendant:
Michael R Pence , Mary Beth Bonaventura , Indiana Department of Child Services and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. A-Alert Security Services, INC. et al
as 1:2015cv03537
Plaintiff:
Shwanda Jones , Shakira Lee , Tamara Jackson and others
Defendant:
A-Alert Security Services, INC., Promex Midwest Corporation, DRE, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Simic v City of Chicago
as 1:2015cv00019
Plaintiff:
Tamara Simic
Defendant:
City Of Chicago
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Loertscher, Tamara v. Schimel, Brad D. et al
as 3:2014cv00870
Plaintiff:
Tamara M. Loertscher
Defendant:
Eloise Anderson and Brad D. Schimel
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.