Cases 31 - 40 of 45
Bayview Loan Servicing LLC et al v. Armstrong et al
as 1:2013cv06840
Defendant:
Bryan Armstrong, Darice Evans Armstrong, HSBC Bank Nevada, NA and others
Plaintiff:
Bayview Loan Servicing LLC and JP Morgan Chase Bank
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1985
Armstrong et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank
as 1:2013cv06841
Plaintiff:
Bryan Armstrong and Darice Armstrong
Defendant:
JPMorgan Chase Bank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
City of Chicago v. Armstrong et al
as 1:2013cv06693
Plaintiff:
City of Chicago
Defendant:
Bryan Armstrong, Darice Armstrong, Aegis Funding Corp. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
City of Chicago v. Armstrong et al
as 1:2013cv05727
Plaintiff:
City of Chicago
Defendant:
Bryan Armstrong, Darice Armstrong, Aegis Funding Corp. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Armstrong v. City Of Chicago
as 1:2013cv05548
Plaintiff:
Bryan Armstrong
Defendant:
City Of Chicago
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Armstrong v. United States Postal Service et al
as 1:2013cv05160
Plaintiff:
Bryan M. Armstrong
Defendant:
United States Postal Service and American Postal Workers Union
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Armstrong et al v. Smith, et al
as 1:2013cv02277
Plaintiff:
Ryan Rogers , Sy-Nai Rogers , Kiara Nicholson and others
Defendant:
Daniel Smith and City of Chicago
Movant:
Gregory E. Kulis & Associates, Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv09777
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv03828
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv06438
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
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.
