Cases 121 - 130 of 4,439
Davis v. Walmart, Inc.
as 1:2024cv03373
Plaintiff:
JoAnn Davis
Defendant:
Walmart, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle
Whitetail Ridge Trust CTO et al v. Benge et al
as 1:2024cv00485
Plaintiff:
Whitetail Ridge Trust CTO and Heavens Door Trust CTO
Defendant:
John Joseph Benge, Dr Keith Davis, Traci Thrap and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Davy v. Revlon and LOreal USA, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv02748
Plaintiff:
Kadian Davy
Defendant:
Revlon and LOreal USA, Inc., Loreal USA Products Inc, Strength of Nature Global LLC. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Davis v. Lutheran Social Services et al
as 1:2024cv00479
Plaintiff:
Clara Marie Davis
Defendant:
Lutheran Social Services, Brenda Hoeper, Sara Sanderson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Crafton v. Davis et al
as 1:2024cv00155
Plaintiff:
Demetrius Crafton
Defendant:
Wendy Davis, Bailey Goodwin, Timothy Stucky and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Maurice G. Davis, Sr. v. J.P. Stadtmueller
as 24-1628
Petitioner:
MAURICE G. DAVIS, SR.
Respondent:
J. P. STADTMUELLER
Ratliff v. Latham et al
as 1:2024cv02855
Plaintiff:
Semaj Ratliff
Defendant:
Latham, Mendoza, Hughes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bowman et al v Ingersoll-Rand Industrial U.S. Inc
as 3:2024cv00285
Plaintiff:
DALLAS BOWMAN, THOMAS DAVIES, FRED FURLANO, SR. and others
Defendant:
INGERSOLL-RAND INDUSTRIAL U.S., INC. and Ingersoll-Rand Industrial U.S. Inc doing business as Ingersoll-Rand
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Davis v. Cook County et al
as 1:2024cv02668
Plaintiff:
Ulysses Charles Davis, III
Defendant:
Cook County, Kimberly M. Fox and Municipal Local Government
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
