Cases 1 - 10 of 40
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv01295
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Hearn v. Winfree et al
as 3:2023cv01222
Plaintiff:
Willie Ray Hearn, Jr.
Defendant:
Officer David Winfree and Officer Jim Strout
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv00535
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00167
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Howe v. Worley
as 2:2021cv00006
Defendant:
Amanda Worley
Plaintiff:
Jim Howe doing business as Big Jim's Bonding
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Irvin v. The City of Clarksville et al
as 3:2020cv00762
Defendant:
The City of Clarksville, Ted Crozier, Jr., Montgomery County, Tennessee and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Thomas Irvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Howe v. Howell et al
as 2:2019cv00067
Defendant:
Casey Cox, Jeff Slayton, Jason Elmore and others
Plaintiff:
Jim Howe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Butler v. Haslam et al
as 3:2019cv00416
Defendant:
Roberta Nevil Kustoff, Richard Montgomery, Tim Gobble and others
Plaintiff:
Dr. Robert C. Butler
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Irvin v. The City of Clarksville et al
as 3:2019cv00157
Defendant:
Governor Bill Lee, The City of Clarksville, County Mayor Jim Durrett and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Thomas Irvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
The People of Ta' Al Amooruc Republic et al v. United States Corporation Company 1925 et al
as 3:2018cv01208
Defendant:
Pete Ricketts, Steve Bullock, Doug Burgum and others
Plaintiff:
Tasheka Kefla Bey, Kadeen Aqil Bey, The People of Ta' Al Amooruc Republic and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
