Cases 61 - 66 of 66
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2008cv60493
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Reverend Reaves v. State of South Carolina
as 08-1235
Plaintiff - Appellant:
REVEREND FRANKLIN C. REAVES, Reverend, FANNIE MELETTE, LAMAR MELETTE and others
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Attorney General Henry McMaster
Defendant - None:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Civil Rights Division Voting Section, JOHN D. ASHCROFT, Attorney General, US Department of Justice, JOSEPH D. RICH, Chief US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Voting Section and others
GREENBERG v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2007cv03664
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW GREENBERG
Defendant:
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION, MARK J. KAPPELHOFF and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
State of Arizona et al v. Marana Health Center Inc.
as 4:2007cv00387
Defendant:
Marana Health Center and Marana Health Center
Plaintiff:
State of Arizona, Terry Goddard, The Civil Rights Division of the Arizona Department of Law and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Goddard et al v. Harkins Amusement Enterprises, Inc. et al.
as 2:2007at10362
Defendant:
Harkins Amusement Enterprises, Inc., Harkins Amusement Enterprises, Inc., Harkins Enterprises, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Terry Goddard, Arizona Law, Civil Rights Division, Department of and Arizona Law, Civil Rights Division, Department of
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Frederick Lindstrom and Larry Wanger
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Petition for Removal
Allen et al v. City of Laurel et al
as 2:2007cv00034
Plaintiff:
Marian Allen and Felix Fenderson
Defendant:
City of Laurel, Mary Ann Hess, Democratic Executive Committee and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
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.
