Cases 1 - 10 of 77
Jernice Hamilton v. Army Board for Corrections
as 22-2121
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JERNICE HAMILTON, a/k/a Garnaris Hamilton
Defendant / Appellee:
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTIONS, Military Records, DENNIS WILLIAM DINGLE, Director 1073592077 and CHARLES M. MARTIN, Chair Person
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01288
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv02155
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00462
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
MARTINO v. COUNTY OF SALEM et al
as 1:2022cv00516
Plaintiff:
RICHARD MARTINO
Defendant:
SSALEM COUNTY, WARDEN JOHN CUZZUPE, SERGEANT DEVAULT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bright v. Thomas et al
as 8:2022cv00024
Plaintiff:
Leon Bright
Defendant:
Austin Thomas, Checkers Drive-In Restuarant, Wow Burgers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bey v. Lupold et al
as 3:2021cv00184
Plaintiff:
Marsielle Bey
Defendant:
Ray P. Lupold, III and Dennis M. Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv05022
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1415
Hamilton v. Army Board of Corrections et al
as 2:2021cv00195
Plaintiff:
Jernice Hamilton and Garnaris Hamilton
Defendant:
Dennis William Dingle, Army Board of Corrections and Charles M Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv01437
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
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.
