Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Druses-Gibbs v. Foot Locker, Inc. et al
as 1:2016cv06581
Plaintiff:
Keanna Druses-Gibbs
Defendant:
Foot Locker Stores, Inc. and Foot Locker, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Kennedy v. Foot Locker, Inc. et al
as 1:2014cv02571
Defendant:
Foot Locker Stores, Inc. and Foot Locker, Inc.
Plaintiff:
James Kennedy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Manduley v. Foot Locker, Inc. et al
as 1:2013cv04888
Defendant:
Foot Locker Retail, Inc. and Foot Locker, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Felix Manduley
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Astarita v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company et al
as 6:2012cv01738
Plaintiff:
Joanne Astarita
Defendant:
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Foot Locker, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
BROWN et al v. FOOT LOCKER, INC. et al
as 2:2011cv04268
Plaintiff:
HALLIE BROWN , DAVID CHEATHAM, JR. , ERIC GUZMAN and others
Defendant:
FOOT LOCKER, INC. and FOOT LOCKER RETAIL, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Brown et al v. Foot Locker Inc. et al
as 3:2011cv02731
Plaintiff:
Hallie Brown , David Cheatham, Jr. , Eric Guzman and others
Defendant:
Foot Locker Inc. and Foot Locker Retail, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
KENNEDY v. FOOT LOCKER, INC. et al
as 2:2011cv03590
Plaintiff:
DAMITA KENNEDY
Defendant:
FOOT LOCKER, INC. , FOOT LOCKER RETAIL, INC. and JOHN DOES
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Kennedy v. Foot Locker, Inc. et al
as 3:2010cv00570
Plaintiff:
Damita Kennedy
Defendant:
Foot Locker, Inc., Foot Locker Retail, Inc. and John Does
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Eric Guzman v. Foot Locker Inc et al
as 5:2010cv01496
Defendant:
Does, Foot Locker Inc and Foot Locker Retail Inc
Plaintiff:
Eric Guzman
Eric Guzman v. Foot Locker Inc et al
as 2:2010cv07410
Defendant:
Does, Foot Locker Inc and Foot Locker Retail Inc
Plaintiff:
Eric Guzman
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.
