Cases 41 - 50 of 1,544
Doe 1 et al v. Juvenile Bureau of Tulsa County District Court et al
as 6:2024cv00182
Defendant:
Office of Juvenile Affairs, Mandi Lee Raymond, Tulsa County Board of County Commissioners and others
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe 1, Parent Doe 2, Parent Doe 1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01477
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12112 Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment Discrimination
BROOKS-COURSEY v. NJ DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES et al
as 1:2024cv06229
Defendant:
INSPIRA MEDICAL CENTER MULLICA HILL, JUNE LONG, ANA UPADHYAH and others
Plaintiff:
LORI A. BROOKS-COURSEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Heon Yoo v. Brian Barker, et al
as 24-1833
Plaintiff:
HEON JONG YOO, Agent of Hank Yoo
Defendant:
BRIAN BARKER, ASMA NISSAR, CARRIER CLINIC PSYCHIATRISTS and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2024cv01523
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Shaw v. Dental Practice of Cordova et al
as 2:2024cv02268
Plaintiff:
Tekeva Shaw
Defendant:
Dental Practice of Cordova, Mid-South Oral Surgery, Christ Community Broad Dental and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
LaSonia Haley v. Walmart Supercenter, et al
as 24-11269
Plaintiff:
LASONIA HALEY
Defendant:
WALMART SUPERCENTER, SAM'S CLUB, BROADMOORE GARDENS and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00271
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Spann v. Gov; Henry McMaster et al
as 3:2024cv02345
Plaintiff:
Freddy Spann
Defendant:
Gov; Henry McMaster and Mental Health Der Clinic
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-40264
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
