Cases 21 - 30 of 35
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv06406
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Muthuswamy v. Liberto et al
as 2:2019cv00112
Defendant:
Ryan Carruth, Covington City, Laura Aucoin and others
Plaintiff:
Murthy Muthuswamy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kilpatrick v. Murthy
as 18-1013
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Gregory D. Kilpatrick
Defendant - Appellee:
Vivek Murthy, United States Surgeon General
Kilpatrick v. Murthy
as 1:2018cv02272
Plaintiff:
Gregory D. Kilpatrick
Defendant:
Vivek Murthy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv06163
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1201 Civil Rights (Disability)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2015cv00259
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343
Arkalgud Lakshminarasimha v. James Cole
as 14-1005
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ARKALGUD N. LAKSHMINARASIMHA
Defendant - Appellee:
JAMES COLE, both individually and in his official capacity as Dep AG, MATTHEW FESAK, both individually and in his official capacity as AUSA, ROY COOPER, both individually and in his official capacity as NC AG and others
Arkalgud Lakshminarasimha v. James Cole
as 13-1401
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ARKALGUD N. LAKSHMINARASIMHA
Defendant - Appellee:
JAMES COLE, both individually and in his official capacity as Dep AG, MATTHEW FESAK, both individually and in his official capacity as AUSA, ROY COOPER, both individually and in his official capacity as NC AG and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2012cv00125
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv01194
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
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.
