Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02379
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 FMLA:Family and Medical Leave Act
BEACH v. BENEDICT et al
as 1:2021cv01406
Plaintiff:
CURTIS W. BEACH
Defendant:
DANNY BARRON, AMY MILLER, DONALD BENEDICT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MILLER v. CITY OF RICHMOND et al
as 1:2017cv00901
Defendant:
CITY OF RICHMOND, CHARLES IRVIN, CHASE PATTON and others
Plaintiff:
MESHACH MILLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BROWN v. CITY OF RICHMOND et al
as 1:2016cv03286
Plaintiff:
LANCE BROWN
Defendant:
CITY OF RICHMOND, JONATHAN HUTH and DAVID SPRADLING
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
TAYLOR v. CITY OF RICHMOND et al
as 1:2016cv01638
Defendant:
CITY OF RICHMOND and JONATHAN HUTH
Plaintiff:
STEVE TAYLOR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
TAYLOR v. CITY OF RICHMOND et al
as 1:2016cv00604
Defendant:
CITY OF RICHMOND and JONATHAN HUTH
Plaintiff:
STEVE TAYLOR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv00342
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
MITCHELL v. CITY OF RICHMOND et al
as 1:2014cv00273
Defendant:
CITY OF RICHMOND, CHUCK IRVIN, AUSTIN LIPPS and others
Plaintiff:
STEPHEN MITCHELL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
ALTIZER et al v. RETHERFORD et al
as 1:2014cv00031
Plaintiff:
GEORGE PAT ALTIZER and JAMIE ALTIZER
Defendant:
OFFICER HEATHER EDWARDS, OFFICER CHARLES IRVIN, OFFICER JOHN ROBERT RETHERFORD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv00178
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
