Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Atteberry v. Smith's Food & Drug Centers, Inc. et al
as 2:2021cv01984
Plaintiff:
Sherrie Atteberry
Defendant:
Smith's Food & Drug Centers, Inc. doing business as Smith's Food and Drug Center and Tyler Tate
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Towers et al v. Villapudua et al
as 2:2016cv02417
Plaintiff:
Roger Towers and Catherine Towers
Defendant:
Carlos Villapudua , Katherine Miller , Moses Zapien and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Atteberry v. Lowe's Home Centers, LLC
as 1:2016cv00033
Plaintiff:
Teresa Atteberry
Defendant:
Lowe's HIW, Inc. and Lowe's Home Centers, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Entler v. Clark et al
as 4:2015cv05054
Plaintiff:
John Thomas Entler
Defendant:
Lynn Clark, Joann McCoy, Fleenor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Walnut Hill Estate Enterprises, et al v. City of Oroville, et al
as 09-17721
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WALNUT HILL ESTATE ENTERPRISES, LLC, JONOTHAN BENEFIELD and JULIE BENEFIELD
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF OROVILLE, DAVID GOYER, SHARON ATTEBERRY and others
Walnut Hill Estate Enterprises, LLC et al v. City of Oroville et al
as 2:2008cv01142
Plaintiff:
Walnut Hill Estate Enterprises, LLC, Jonothan Benefield and Julie Benefield
Defendant:
City of Oroville, David Goyer, Sharon Atteberry and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2007cv01714
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2007at00775
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv00259
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
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.
