Cases 11 - 20 of 20
SRIVASTAVA v. ROBERTS et al
as 1:2013cv00200
Defendant:
SARAH EVANS BARKER, GERALD BEPKO, BOSE MCKINNEY & EVANS LLP and others
Plaintiff:
CAROLYN H. SRIVASTAVA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2013cv00014
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Mediator:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
WAGNER v. BURNS et al
as 1:2012cv01879
Defendant:
ROBERT BURNS, CORIZON MEDICAL SERVICES, JOHN DOE-EYE and others
Plaintiff:
LONNIE WAGNER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Medical Malpractice
SRIVASTAVA v. JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER INDIANAPOLIS, INC. et al
as 1:2012cv01848
Defendant:
AFNI, INC., GREGORY BALLARD, SARAH EVANS BARKER and others
Plaintiff:
CAROLYN HERZ SRIVASTAVA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal
SRIVASTAVA v. THE TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY et al
as 1:2012cv01309
Defendant:
JOHN BARTHOLOMEW, EVAN BAYH, GERALD BEPKO and others
Plaintiff:
CAROLYN HERZ SRIVASTAVA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal
O'Grady v. Noll et al
as 1:2011cv00354
Defendant:
Sgt John Noll , Scott Berning , Derrick Westfield and others
Plaintiff:
Michael A O'Grady
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2010cv00487
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 626
WAGNER v. THE STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2009cv00609
Plaintiff:
DOUGLAS G. WAGNER
Defendant:
THE STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2008cv00542
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2008cv00675
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
