Cases 1 - 10 of 1,610
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01411
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
SHAW v. MARKS et al
as 2:2024cv00706
Plaintiff:
ARIES SHAW
Defendant:
AARON M. MARKS, JOEY D BRANT, CORPORAL MARIACHER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Shaw v. Memphis Police Department et al
as 2:2024cv02309
Plaintiff:
Tekeva Deshuna Shaw
Defendant:
Memphis Police Department, Memphis Police Internal Affairs Bureau, Tennessee Highway Patrol and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv03842
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
RIVAZ v. MCNEIL et al
as 5:2024cv00083
Plaintiff:
JARREL DANIEL RIVAZ
Defendant:
RAYMOND MCNEIL, JOSEPH HUTCHISON and KRISTIAN SHAW
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2024cv01570
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Shaw v. Dental Practice of Cordova et al
as 2:2024cv02268
Plaintiff:
Tekeva Shaw
Defendant:
Dental Practice of Cordova, Mid-South Oral Surgery, Christ Community Broad Dental and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Shaw v. Dermatology Realm et al
as 2:2024cv02271
Plaintiff:
Tekeva Shaw
Defendant:
Dermatology Realm, Clarx Big Country Dermatology, Memphis Dermatology and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Shaw v. Raymond's Auto Repair
as 2:2024cv02270
Plaintiff:
Tekeva Shaw
Defendant:
Raymond's Auto Repair
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-11239
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Not Yet Classified:
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.
