Cases 11 - 20 of 1,066
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2024cv00520
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
Botheroyd v. Metra Police Department et al
as 1:2024cv02823
Plaintiff:
Clifford Botheroyd
Defendant:
Metra Police Department, Luis Rodriguez and Jose Monterrubio
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Clifford Frost, Jr. v. Dana Nessel
as 24-1132
Plaintiff:
CLIFFORD JAMES FROST, JR.
Defendant:
DANA NESSEL, Attorney General of the State of Michigan; in official capacity
Fantel, Jr. v. Town of South Kingstown et al
as 1:2024cv00081
Plaintiff:
Clifford John Fantel, Jr.
Defendant:
Town of South Kingstown, South Kingstown Police Department, Washington County Courthouse and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Fantel, Jr. v. State of Rhode Island
as 1:2024cv00120
Plaintiff:
Clifford John Fantel, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Rhode Island
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Fantel, Jr. v. FBI et al
as 1:2024cv00118
Plaintiff:
Clifford John Fantel, Jr.
Defendant:
FBI, Caitlin Isherwood and Mark Trovato
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Houston v. Logan
as 3:2024cv00126
Plaintiff:
Clifford Leon Houston
Defendant:
James F. Logan, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Lu v. Reyes et al
as 2:2024cv00029
Plaintiff:
Yan-Xu Lu
Defendant:
Sean D. Reyes, Kyle J Kaiser, J Clifford Petersen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00185
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00630
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
