Cases 1 - 10 of 13
METZGER GARRETT v. THOR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY et al
as 1:2021cv01171
Plaintiff:
RIKKI METZER GARRETT and RIKKI METZGER GARRETT
Defendant:
DAN STAMPER, AMBER BEACH and THOR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Wilkinson v. RM Auctions Inc
as 1:2020cv00077
Defendant:
RM AUCTIONS, INC.
Plaintiff:
DAN WILKINSON
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
HASH v. CITY OF GREENSBURG, et al.
as 1:2019cv01157
Plaintiff:
Dan Manus, Linda Hash and Kathy Reynolds
Defendant:
City of Greensburg
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
Manoloff v. Erwin Hymer Group North America Inc
as 3:2019cv00091
Defendant:
ERWIN HYMER GROUP NORTH AMERICA, INC. and Erwin Hymer Group North America Inc
Plaintiff:
DANIEL MANOLOFF and Dan Manoloff
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
PIGG v. ROSE-HULMAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
as 2:2016cv00298
Plaintiff:
DAN PIGG
Defendant:
ROSE-HULMAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 FMLA:Family and Medical Leave Act
WILLIAMS et al v. ANGIE'S LIST, INC.
as 1:2016cv00878
Defendant:
ANGIE'S LIST, INC.
Plaintiff:
ROBERT AVILA, ANDREW BARTON, ERIN BURGESS and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
MILLER v. NEARY
as 4:2015cv00169
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. MILLER
Defendant:
DAN NEARY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.
RAHMAN v. WINDSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. et al
as 4:2015cv00066
Defendant:
DAN BATES and WINDSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Plaintiff:
ERIC RAHMAN
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
BARTON et al v. DAN K. TAYLOR TRUCKING, LLC
as 1:2013cv02046
Plaintiff:
DANNY BARTON and INDIANA TEAMSTERS HEALTH BENEFITS FUND
Defendant:
DAN K. TAYLOR TRUCKING, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
ALBAUGH v. BALDWIN & LYONS, INC.
as 1:2012cv01097
Plaintiff:
DAN ALBAUGH
Defendant:
BALDWIN & LYONS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
