Cases 51 - 60 of 341
Lawver v. Owens Corning Composite Materials, LLC
as 1:2022cv03133
Plaintiff:
Joseph Lawver
Defendant:
Owens Corning Composite Materials, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Browning v. City of Union
as 7:2022cv02845
Plaintiff:
Tamika Browning
Defendant:
City of Union
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Gleaton v. Cayce, City of
as 3:2022cv03342
Plaintiff:
James Gleaton
Defendant:
Cayce, City of
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Wooles v. Countybank
as 8:2022cv02808
Plaintiff:
Michael Wooles
Defendant:
Countybank
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Reynolds v. Summey et al
as 2:2022cv02649
Plaintiff:
Delisa M. Reynolds
Defendant:
Keith R. Summey, Deborah Crosby Summey, North Charleston, City of and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Smith v. Graziano et al
as 2:2022cv02821
Plaintiff:
Joyce Smith
Defendant:
Kristin Graziano, Ameed Sad and Charleston County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Hester v. City of Bishopville Police Department et al
as 3:2022cv01586
Plaintiff:
William H. Hester
Defendant:
Bishopville Police Department, City of, Bishopville, City of and City of Bishopville Police Department
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Joyner v. Hampton County
as 9:2022cv01030
Plaintiff:
Tyrell Joyner
Defendant:
Hampton County
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Freeman v. D&D Motors, Inc. et al
as 7:2022cv01464
Plaintiff:
Tim Freeman
Defendant:
D&D Motors, Inc. and George "Skip" Davenport, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Fernanders v. Thorne Research, Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv00487
Plaintiff:
Kelly Fernanders
Defendant:
Thorne Research, Inc. and Alan Newsome
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave 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.
