Cases 11 - 20 of 92
Gill v. Hammond The City of et al
as 2:2022cv00327
Plaintiff:
Mark A Gill
Defendant:
Hammond The City of, Thomas M McDermott Jr, The Hammond Police Dpt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00395
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02108
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
MOORE v. CHAVIS
as 1:2022cv01783
Plaintiff:
BRIAN S. MOORE
Defendant:
JOHN M.T. CHAVIS, MELISSICA FLIPPEN, ALEYNE WOOD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 dp Civil Rights - Denial of Due Process
Woods et al v. Richardson et al
as 2:2022cv00265
Plaintiff:
Myshira Woods and Demetri Woods
Defendant:
Latasha Richardson, Kathryn Malon, B. Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Petition for Removal
WOODS v. IMPD
as 1:2022cv01665
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM PLYANDER WOODS
Defendant:
IMPD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00267
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Hires v. Mishawaka City of et al
as 3:2022cv00130
Plaintiff:
Tamara M Hires
Defendant:
Mishawaka City of, Kenneth Witkowski, Jr, Aaron Lower and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00082
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Not Classified By Court:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv00397
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
