Cases 31 - 40 of 45
ADEGBITE et al v. MURDOCH et al
as 2:2012cv00520
Plaintiff:
VANESSA ADEGBITE and MONA BARKER
Defendant:
RUPERT MURDOCH, NEW YORK POST, NEWS CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richards v. Fox 2 News et al
as 2:2011cv15280
Plaintiff:
Kyle Richards
Defendant:
Fox 2 News, United States of America and Fox News Corporation
Satkar Hospitality, Incorporat, et al v. Fox Television Stations, Incor, et al
as 11-3572
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SATKAR HOSPITALITY, INCORPORATED, SHARAD K. DANI and HARISH DANI
Defendant - Appellee:
FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INCORPORATED, NEWS CORPORATION, ILLINOIS REVIEW and others
Rodriguez v. The Daily News Corporation et al
as 1:2011cv07995
Plaintiff:
Francisco Rodriguez
Defendant:
The Daily News Corporation, Michael J. Feeney, Bob Kappstatter and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Li v. The Post Standard
as 11-2768
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Xiang Li
Defendant - Appellee:
The Post Standard, Sue Weibazahi, Marine Eisenstadt and others
ADEGBITE v. MURDOCH et al
as 2:2011cv00492
Plaintiff:
VANESSA ADEGBITE
Defendant:
RUPERT MURDOCH, NEW YORK POST, NEWS CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Satkar Hospitality Inc et al
as 1:2010cv06682
Plaintiff:
Satkar Hospitality Inc , sharad k dani and harish dani
Defendant:
Cook County Board of Review, The, larry r rogers, Joseph Berrios and others
Garnishee:
dennis g lacomb
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Li v. The Post Standard et al
as 5:2010cv00805
Plaintiff:
Xiang Li
Defendant:
The Post Standard, Sue Weibazahi, Marine Eisenstadt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv09832
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv09323
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
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.
