Cases 1 - 10 of 19
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02960
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00426
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv04363
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Osborn v. Coffman et al
as 3:2022cv01528
Plaintiff:
Steven Osborn
Defendant:
CEO Coffman and St. Joseph's Drug Rehab
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01971
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00285
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00285
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv01961
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2020cv06269
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
ADORERS OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST, UNITED STATES PROVINCE et al v. TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
as 5:2020cv05627
Plaintiff:
ADORERS OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST, UNITED STATES PROVINCE, SISTER MARY ALAN WURTH, SISTER DANI BROUGHT and others
Defendant:
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 bb
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.
