Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Barajas v. Saline County, Arkansas et al
as 4:2024cv00318
Plaintiff:
Maria Elena Barajas
Defendant:
Saline County, Arkansas, Hunter Thompson, Sullivan Sulzberger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McCarty v. VIP Logistics LLC et al
as 4:2023cv00150
Plaintiff:
Bobbie Ray McCarty
Defendant:
VIP Logistics LLC, VIP Supply Chain Solutions LLC, Bobin Trucking LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Tort/Motor Vehicle (P.I.)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv00172
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Vertical Bridge Development LLC v. West Memphis City Council et al
as 2:2020cv00248
Defendant:
Tracy Catt, Melanie Hutchison, James Pulliaum and others
Plaintiff:
Vertical Bridge Development LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Clark v. Abusara et al
as 4:2019cv00815
Plaintiff:
Colla Clark and Colla Hatter
Defendant:
Mohammed Abusara, Exchange Logistics Inc and Abusare Mohammad
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Pittman v. Shark Bites Inc et al
as 4:2018cv00415
Defendant:
Mahdi Saleh, T & A Sharks of Little Rock Inc, Shark Bites Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Jesyca Pittman
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Anderson v. Kamel et al
as 5:2017cv00292
Plaintiff:
James Kenneth Anderson
Defendant:
Mohammed Kamel, Fade Mahmoud, Jeffery Stieve and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Siddig v. Neald et al
as 4:2015cv00464
Plaintiff:
Mohammed Siddig
Defendant:
Neald, Lowe, Holloman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Siddig v. Baxter et al
as 4:2015cv00026
Plaintiff:
Mohammed B Siddig
Defendant:
Ray Baxter and Stephen A Shoptaw
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Alam v. Social Security Administration
as 5:2014cv00366
Plaintiff:
Mohammed Monjurul Alam
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
