Cases 71 - 80 of 1,448
Jones v. United States Postal Service et al
as 2:2023cv01151
Plaintiff:
Cortez Daundre Jones
Defendant:
United States Postal Service, Washington State Department of Revenue and Bob Ferguson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01486
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Robledo v. United States of America et al
as 1:2023cv05509
Plaintiff:
XIOMARA ROBLEDO
Defendant:
United States of America and United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1227
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
RODRIGUEZ v. DEJOY et al
as 2:2023cv03736
Plaintiff:
MARIA J RODRIGUEZ
Defendant:
POSYMASTER GENERAL LOUIS DEJOY, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE AGENCY, JOHN DOES 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0794 Job Discrimination (Handicap)
Pakuja Vang v. Catawba Medical Center
as 23-1711
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PAKUJA CRYSTAL VANG
Defendant / Appellee:
CATAWBA MEDICAL CENTER, CATAWBA VALLEY FAMILY MEDICINE CLAREMONT, BETHANY MEDICAL CENTER and others
Casanova v. Biden et al
as 3:2023cv00392
Plaintiff:
Ashley Casanova
Defendant:
President Joe Biden, Federal Government, North Carolina and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv04053
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00595
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1674
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
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.
