Cases 121 - 130 of 9,225
Lietzke v. Montgomery City of et al
as 5:2024cv00092
Plaintiff:
Bill Lietzke
Defendant:
Montgomery City of and Kevin Murphy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lietzke v. Montgomery City of et al
as 5:2024cv00093
Plaintiff:
Bill Lietzke
Defendant:
Montgomery City of and Kevin Murphy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lietzke v. Montgomery City of et al
as 5:2024cv00094
Plaintiff:
Bill Lietzke
Defendant:
Montgomery City of and Kevin Murphy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lietzke v. Montgomery City of et al
as 5:2024cv00095
Plaintiff:
Bill Lietzke
Defendant:
Montgomery City of and Kevin Murphy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Washburn v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of Garfield et al
as 5:2023cv01132
Plaintiff:
Dale Kim Washburn
Defendant:
Board of County Commissioners of the County of Garfield, Town of Waukomis, Cory Rink and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00522
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Washington v. Gilmore et al
as 4:2023cv00549
Plaintiff:
Donna Washington
Defendant:
Naciska Gilmore, Latressa Avery, Charene Nowicki and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Crow v. Tulsa Technology Center School District No. 18
as 4:2023cv00544
Plaintiff:
Martin D Crow
Defendant:
Tulsa Technology Center and Tulsa Technology Center School District No. 18
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Glasscock v. Kelsey et al
as 4:2023cv00518
Plaintiff:
Steven Glasscock
Defendant:
Jason Kelsey and USPS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00014
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
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.
