Cases 1 - 10 of 16
SANTIAGO v. FIBCO INC et al
as 4:2024cv00343
Defendant:
FIBCO INC and DONALD L BRADDY JR
Plaintiff:
JAMES SANTIAGO
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Taylor et al
as 1:2024cv00019
Plaintiff:
Robert M. Taylor, III, Deborah R. Mangum, Leonard K. Sweatman and others
Defendant:
Piedmont Healthcare, Inc. and University Health Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1362 ERISA
Taylor et al v. University Health Services, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv00047
Plaintiff:
Robert M. Taylor, III, Deborah R. Mangum, Leonard K. Sweatman and others
Defendant:
University Health Services, Inc. and Piedmont Healthcare, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.
BRADDY v. UNITED COLLECTION BUREAU, INC
as 0:2022cv60868
Plaintiff:
KATHLEEN BRADDY
Defendant:
UNITED COLLECTION BUREAU, INC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
BRADDY v. TRENCHLESS SEWER LINE REPAIRS LLC et al
as 1:2021cv23222
Plaintiff:
LENARIS BRADDY
Defendant:
TRENCHLESS SEWER LINE REPAIRS LLC and JOHN S. WALTERS
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
BRADDY v. UNITED COLLECTION BUREAU, INC
as 0:2020cv62022
Plaintiff:
KATHLEEN BRADDY
Defendant:
UNITED COLLECTION BUREAU, INC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
Braddy v. Robinson
as 1:2019cv25140
Defendant:
James T. Robinson, The Trap Lounge and James T. Robinson doing business as Booby Trap Lounge also known as The Trap Lounge
Plaintiff:
Stacey Braddy
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
Braddy v. Robinson
as 1:2019cv22993
Defendant:
James T. Robinson and The Trap Lounge
Plaintiff:
Stacey Braddy
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
ROBERSON v. FIBCO INC et al
as 5:2018cv00113
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW ROBERSON
Defendant:
FIBCO INC and DONALD BRADDY, JR
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Braddy v. Five-Star Food Services, Inc.
as 3:2016cv00748
Plaintiff:
Janice Braddy
Defendant:
Five-Star Food Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
