Cases 31 - 40 of 50
March v. Aramark Corporation et al
as 3:2017cv00253
Plaintiff:
Perry Avram March
Defendant:
Aramark Corporation, Aramark Correction Services, LLC, Tennessee Department of Correction and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Shelby County Jail et al
as 2:2016cv02567
Plaintiff:
Develle Johnson
Defendant:
Shelby County Jail and Aramark Food Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Erby v. Luttrell et al
as 2:2016cv03020
Plaintiff:
Fred Erby
Defendant:
Mark H. Luttrell, William J. Gupton, Jr., William Spears and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Myers v. Aramark Food Services et al
as 2:2015cv02824
Plaintiff:
Mario Marquette Myers
Defendant:
Aramark Food Services and Shirley Hayslett
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rowland v. Aramark Food Services et al
as 2:2015cv02714
Plaintiff:
Johnny Rowland
Defendant:
Aramark Food Services and Hayslett
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Martinez v. Shelby County Division of Corrections et al
as 2:2015cv02618
Plaintiff:
Douglas Martinez
Defendant:
Shelby County Division of Corrections, William Gupton, Spears and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Benson v. Unknown Agents of Aramark Food Services for the S.C.C.J.C. et al
as 2:2015cv02518
Plaintiff:
Ricky Benson
Defendant:
Unknown Agents of Aramark Food Services for the S.C.C.J.C., Echols, Townsel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Anderson v. Moore et al
as 2:2014cv02778
Plaintiff:
Armando Q. Anderson
Defendant:
Robert Moore, Oldham, Haselett and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. City of Memphis et al
as 2:2014cv02295
Plaintiff:
Joseph E. Jones, III
Defendant:
City of Memphis, State of TN, Shelby County D.A. Office and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Keen v. Aramark
as 2:2012cv02650
Plaintiff:
Terry Keen
Defendant:
Aramark
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
