Cases 1 - 10 of 55
Lentz v. MDOC et al
as 2:2024cv10198
Plaintiff:
Gary Lentz
Defendant:
MDOC, Heidi Washington, Aleksandra Wilanowski and others
Webster v. Autozone Development, LLC et al
as 2:2023cv13033
Plaintiff:
Dwayne E. Webster
Defendant:
Autozone Development, LLC, Autzone Stores, LLC, AutoZone, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv11517
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Barr et al v. Corewell Health
as 2:2023cv10808
Plaintiff:
Emily Barr, Carolyn Earl, Rita Hanna and others
Defendant:
Corewell Health d/b/a Beaumont Health and Corewell Health Doing business as Beaumont Health
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Webster v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2023cv10704
Plaintiff:
Mark Webster
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, MRF, FNU Montgomery and others
Hull v. Coleman et al
as 1:2023cv10067
Plaintiff:
Austin Hull
Defendant:
Spencer Coleman, Ken Miller and William Webster
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Barr et al v. 1.Beaumont Health Service Center
as 2:2022cv13051
Plaintiff:
Emily Barr, Carolyn Earl, Rita Hanna and others
Defendant:
1.Beaumont Health Service Center
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Webster v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2022cv12847
Plaintiff:
Mark Webster
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, Chapman, Jenkins and others
Webster v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2022cv12848
Plaintiff:
Mark Webster
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, Chapman, G. Stephenson and others
Webster v. Target Corporation
as 2:2022cv11293
Plaintiff:
Caprice Webster
Defendant:
Target Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-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.
