Cases 41 - 50 of 81
M.P.T.C. v. Nelson County School District et al
as 3:2014cv00041
Plaintiff:
M.P.T.C.
Defendant:
Nelson County School District , Anthony Orr , Shelly Hendricks and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2013cv00155
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2013cv00865
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Miller et al v. Boyd County Sheriff's Department et al
as 0:2013cv00073
Plaintiff:
Jerry Miller
Defendant:
Boyd County Sheriff's Department , Terry R. Keelin , Jason C. Nattier and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv00095
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Stewart v. Harlan City Police Department et al
as 6:2013cv00066
Plaintiff:
Carl Edward Stewart
Defendant:
Harlan City Police Department, Mike Thomas, Craig Miller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Stewart v. Harlan, Kentucky et al
as 6:2013cv00044
Plaintiff:
Linda Stewart
Defendant:
City of Harlan, Kentucky , Harlan City Police Department , Hunter Luttrell and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Hopson v. Weinburg et al
as 3:2012cv00772
Plaintiff:
DeAndre Hopson
Defendant:
David Weinburg, Weinburg, Simpson, III and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Hopson v. Secret Service et al
as 3:2012cv00770
Plaintiff:
De'Andre Hopson
Defendant:
Secret Service, FBI, Adam Solinger and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Harrell v. Office of Personnel Management, et al
as 2:2012cv00192
Plaintiff:
Elza L Harrell
Defendant:
Office of Personnel Management and Alan Miller
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
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.
