Cases 1 - 10 of 5,721
Hill v. Covey et al
as 1:2024cv05105
Plaintiff:
Jaqwon Hill
Defendant:
Ian Covey and Village of Midlothian
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2024cv01790
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Hill v. Stockdale et al
as 4:2024cv00407
Plaintiff:
Antonio Hill
Defendant:
Judge Kyndra J Stockdale, Judge Susan E. Long and Rex A. Redlingshafer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Housing Discrimination
Victoria Tenisha Shanae Dillihunt v. Danica Roem et al
as 2:2024cv04886
Plaintiff:
Victoria Tenisha Shanae Dillihunt
Defendant:
Danica Roem, Phyllis Randolph Frye, Mickey Leland Courthouse and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00603
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hill v. Walmart, Inc.
as 4:2024cv00197
Plaintiff:
Antonia Hill
Defendant:
Walmart, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2024cv00217
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Hill et al v. Young et al
as 2:2024cv00737
Plaintiff:
Tameca Hill
Defendant:
Brian Young, Richard Tolentino, Alexander Verreault and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Procter v. Farmington Hills Police Department
as 2:2024cv11520
Plaintiff:
Clark Procter
Defendant:
Farmington Hills Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hurst v. Auburn Hills Police Department et al
as 4:2024cv11522
Plaintiff:
Arnold Hurst
Defendant:
Auburn Hills Police Department, Moore and Bryant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 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.
