Cases 1 - 10 of 10
FORRESTER v. EYE CARE LEADERS HOLDINGS, LLC
as 1:2022cv00503
Plaintiff:
CHAD FORRESTER
Defendant:
EYE CARE LEADERS HOLDINGS, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity
FARLEY v. EYE CARE LEADERS HOLDINGS, LLC
as 1:2022cv00468
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY FARLEY and ALL PLAINTIFFS
Defendant:
EYE CARE LEADERS HOLDINGS, LLC
Interested Party:
KIMBERLY SANDVIG, CHAD FORRESTER, JEANNE BYERS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
WALL v. GULLEDGE et al
as 1:2022cv00031
Plaintiff:
FELISHA WALL
Defendant:
MARK GULLEDGE, J.R. DENNIS SMITH, JAMES P. DAVIS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv00123
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
HARRIS v. IMMACULATE MIC'S, LLC et al
as 1:2018cv00600
Defendant:
MICAH B FORREST, IMMACULATE MIC'S, LLC and MICAH B. FORREST
Plaintiff:
SEAN HARRIS
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
WRAY v. SAUNDER et al
as 1:2013cv00350
Plaintiff:
JOHN LEWIS WRAY, JR.
Defendant:
SORELL SAUNDER, PAT MCCRORY, ROY COOPER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. DALY SEVEN, INC. et al
as 1:2012cv00510
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL FORREST JONES
Defendant:
DALY SEVEN, INC. , JON M. DALY, JR. and NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
ROBINETTE v. DUKE UNIVERSITY
as 1:2011cv00536
Plaintiff:
JUSTIN ROBINETTE
Defendant:
DUKE UNIVERSITY, THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF DUKE UNIVERSITY, THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv01009
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MICHAEL et al v. WHITE
as 1:2008cv00767
Plaintiff:
PAUL FORREST MICHAEL and STEPHANIE HAMAKER MICHAEL
Defendant:
CHARLES LAWRENCE WHITE
Cause Of Action: Diversity
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.
