Cases 11 - 20 of 101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 22-12200
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Vanloan et al v. The Nation of Islam et al
as 3:2022cv00787
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Vanloan
Defendant:
The Nation of Islam, Louis Farrafhan, Tony Muhammad and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cv Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00820
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
LAWYERS FOR FAIR RECIPROCAL ADMISSION v. UNITED STATES et al
as 3:2022cv02399
Plaintiff:
LAWYERS FOR FAIR RECIPROCAL ADMISSION
Defendant:
UNITED STATES, MERICK B GARLAND, CHIEF JUDGE MICHAEL A CHAGARES and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 22-1609
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Georgette Purnell v. N. Hunt, et al
as 22-15489
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GEORGETTE G. PURNELL
Defendant / Appellee:
N. HUNT, Sergeant #16934, LUPER, Officer, GARCIA-PERALTA, Officer and others
CRAIG v. DENNIS et al
as 5:2022cv00049
Plaintiff:
KAREN GEORGETTE CRAIG
Defendant:
SARAH DENNIS, JONES COUNTY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, JANA WADELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Fleming et al v. SMITH
as 2:2021cv05446
Plaintiff:
Georgette Fleming and Tasheeba Fleming-Moore
Defendant:
CHAD SMITH and P/O CHAD SMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sons v. John Does 1-12 et al
as 1:2021cv00327
Plaintiff:
Georgette Sons
Defendant:
John Does 1-12, Lawrence Battiste and City Of Mobile
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
VANLOAN v. THE NATION OF ISLAM et al
as 2:2021cv02559
Defendant:
POLICE CHIEF DAVID NISLEIT, MAIN LINE HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., RICHARD ORLOW and others
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN VANLOAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
