Cases 11 - 20 of 26
Davis v. Rao et al
as 3:2013cv00239
Plaintiff:
Bonnie Newman Davis
Defendant:
Michael Rao, L. Terry Oggel, Fred M. Hawkridge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Nash v. Taylor et al
as 5:2012cv00077
Defendant:
Judge William G. Barkley, County of Albemarle, Judge Cheryl V. Higgins and others
Plaintiff:
Michael David Nash
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2011cv00164
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Dinwiddie et al v. Giles County, Virginia Department of Social Services et al
as 7:2011cv00008
Plaintiff:
AD, CD, Fred Dinwiddie and others
Defendant:
Amy Bishop, Phil Blankenbeckler, Linda Boggs and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2011cv00005
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Minnis et al v. Johnson et al
as 1:2010cv00096
Plaintiff:
Gary Minnis, Larry More, David Richardson and others
Defendant:
Gene Johnson, Fred Schilling, Robin Hulbert and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Mauney v. Williams et al
as 1:2009cv01230
Plaintiff:
Fred Woodrow Mauney, Jr.
Defendant:
David C. Williams, United States Postal Service and Gordon J. Thompson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv00978
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Hill v. Noble et al
as 1:2009cv00040
Plaintiff:
Christina Hill
Defendant:
H Lee Noble, Kavah Ofagh, R Howe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2009cv00149
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.
