Cases 11 - 20 of 208
MURPHY v. COOK INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2023cv06983
Plaintiff:
DAWANA MURPHY
Defendant:
COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL INCORPORATED, COOK GROUP INCORPORATED and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00319
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02485
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
MOTON v. WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC et al
as 1:2022cv02134
Plaintiff:
ANDRE MOTON
Defendant:
WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC, ELAINE PERDUE, LISA HAMBLEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
EDWARDS v. CARTER JR. et al
as 1:2022cv01588
Plaintiff:
MURPHY EDWARDS
Defendant:
ROBERT E. CARTER JR., DAUSS, DENNIS REAGAL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WEINSCHENK v. UNITED STATES et al
as 1:2022cv01150
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WEINSCHENK
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA, ERIC HOLCOMB, SUZANNE CROUCH and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2333 Civil Remedies: Anti-Terrorism Act of 1991
MURPHY v. COOK INCOPORATED et al
as 1:2021cv06682
Plaintiff:
TONY MURPHY
Defendant:
COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL INCORPORATED, COOK GROUP INCORPORATED and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ELLIS v. DAVIS CARPER et al
as 1:2021cv02750
Plaintiff:
DEMAJIO J. ELLIS
Defendant:
LINDA DAVIS CARPER, JODIE MURPHY, BRITTNEY GROVES-MOORE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ELLIS v. COMMANDER et al
as 1:2021cv02656
Plaintiff:
DEMAJIO J. ELLIS
Defendant:
COMMANDER, AMBER, GARY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01947
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1681
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.
