Cases 11 - 20 of 10,426
RINKER v. ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC. et al
as 1:2024cv00700
Plaintiff:
ADONIS ROBERT RINKER
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC., MICHAEL CECIL, BRIDGEMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MCLAIN v. WALMART, INC. et al
as 1:2024cv00686
Plaintiff:
Shelby McLain
Defendant:
WALMART, INC. and WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Petition for Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00692
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
THOMAS ROEHRMAN V. LEADSMARKET.COM, LLC, MARKETING LABS LLC and NESMETAJU, LLC
as 1:2024cv00682
Plaintiff:
Thomas Roehrman
Defendant:
Leadsmarket.com, Marketing Labs, LLC and Nesmetaju, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
COVINGTON v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP
as 1:2024cv00665
Plaintiff:
RONALD COVINGTON
Defendant:
WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
LUNSFORD v. BLACKBURN et al
as 1:2024cv00678
Plaintiff:
SCOTTIE LUNSFORD
Defendant:
BLACKBURN, HOWARD COUNTY SHERIFF, CENTURION MEDICAL STAFF and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
AYERS v. CALLAHAN et al
as 1:2024cv00653
Plaintiff:
JARON AYERS
Defendant:
BLAKE CALLAHAN and TOWN OF CHESTERFIELD, IN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00655
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgement
LINTHICUM v. CENTURION et al
as 1:2024cv00659
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN LINTHICUM
Defendant:
CENTURION and RUNYON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00637
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
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.
