Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Smith v. Circle K Inc. et al (MAG+)
as 2:2023cv00578
Plaintiff:
Peter J. Smith
Defendant:
Circle K Inc., Alimentation Couche-Tard, Brian Hannasch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Smith v. Circle K Inc. et al (MAG+)
as 2:2023cv00576
Plaintiff:
Peter J. Smith
Defendant:
Circle K Stores Inc., Alimentation Couche-Tard, Brian Hannasch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00195
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Smith v. Circle K Inc. et al(MAG+)
as 2:2020cv00699
Plaintiff:
Peter J. Smith
Defendant:
Shelisa Saukey, Alimentation Couche-Tard, Circle K Inc. doing business as Circle K and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Couch v. Finley (MAG+)
as 2:2016cv00698
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Couch
Defendant:
Ernest Finley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Couch v. Hardwick (MAG+)
as 2:2016cv00691
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Couch
Defendant:
Johnny Hardwick
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Couch v. Hardwick (JOINT ASSIGN)(MAG+)
as 2:2016cv00665
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Couch
Defendant:
Johnny Hardwick
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Couch et al v. Department of Human Resources et al (MAG+)
as 2:2016cv00144
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Couch and K. L.
Defendant:
Department of Human Resources, Nicole Norris, Amanda Faulk and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Couch v. Montgomery City Police Department et al (MAG+)
as 2:2013cv00434
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Monique Couch
Defendant:
Montgomery City Police Department, Montgomery Area Mental Health, Kevin Murphy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Couch v. Marshall et al(MAG+)
as 2:2011cv00950
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Monique Couch
Defendant:
D. T. Marshall and Dante' Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.