Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv00838
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv00026
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Ackerman et al v. Hamilton Township et al
as 1:2013cv00080
Plaintiff:
Richard Ackerman , Dora C. Ackerman , Gregory E. Thompson and others
Defendant:
Hamilton Township , Hamilton Township Police District , Hamilton Township Board of Trustees and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2012cv03054
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2009cv00136
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Newman v. Cikulin et al
as 1:2008cv07456
Plaintiff:
Anthony Newman
Defendant:
D. Cikulin, M Clemons, D. Reum and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Marcellus Mason, Jr. v. Thomas Kahn
as 08-5456
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Marcellus M. Mason, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
Thomas K. Kahn, In his Official Capacity as Clerk, US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, Michael B. Mukasey, In his Official Capacity as Attorney General of the United States and Eric H. Holder, Jr., In his Official Capacity as Attorney General of the United States
MASON v. KAHN et al
as 1:2008cv01143
Plaintiff:
MARCELLUS M. MASON, JR.
Defendant:
THOMAS K. KAHN and MICHAEL MUKASEY
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
MASON v. KAHN et al
as 1:2008cv01146
Plaintiff:
MARCELLUS M. MASON, JR.
Defendant:
THOMAS K. KAHN and MICHAEL MUKASEY
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2008cv02120
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
