Cases 1 - 10 of 936
Fantel, Jr. v. State of Rhode Island et al
as 1:2024cv00220
Plaintiff:
Clifford John Fantel, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Rhode Island and Town of South Kingston
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Fantel, Jr. v. State of Rhode Island et al
as 1:2024cv00213
Plaintiff:
Clifford John Fantel, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Rhode Island and Town of South Kingstown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Cronan v. Nerhona et al
as 1:2024cv00207
Plaintiff:
Laurie Cronan
Defendant:
Peter Nerhona, Daniel Ballirano, Kerry Travers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McGovern et al v. Bailey et al
as 1:2024cv00198
Plaintiff:
David M. McGovern and Local 1703 of the I.A.F.F.
Defendant:
William Bailey and Town of Tiverton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McGovern et al v. William et al
as 1:2024cv00197
Plaintiff:
David M. McGovern and Local 1703 of the I.A.F.F.
Defendant:
Bailey William and Town of Tiverton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McGovern et al v. Bailey et al
as 1:2024cv00199
Plaintiff:
David M. McGovern and Local 1703 of the I.A.F.F.
Defendant:
William Bailey, III and Town of Tiverton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Li v. Su et al
as 1:2024cv00200
Plaintiff:
Bing Hong Li
Defendant:
Ming Ming Su, Patrick Li, US Department of States and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Estime v. An
as 1:2024cv00193
Plaintiff:
Juliana Estime
Defendant:
Kenneth An
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 754 Discrimination
Jensen v. Rhode Island Cannabis Control Commission et al
as 1:2024cv00191
Plaintiff:
Justyna Jensen
Defendant:
Rhode Island Cannabis Control Commission and Kimberly Ahern
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Acosta v. Providence Police Department
as 1:2024cv00187
Plaintiff:
Robert Acosta, Jr.
Defendant:
Providence Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
