Cases 11 - 20 of 173
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2023cv60373
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
TRIBBLE v. SECURUS et al
as 1:2023cv00032
Defendant:
ROBERT TRIBBLE, SECURUS doing business as JPAY doing business as UNITY TABLE GROUP, ARAMARK FOOD SERVICES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Waltkins v. Aramark et al
as 6:2023cv00196
Plaintiff:
Mario Waltkins
Defendant:
Aramark, Florida Department of Health, Wayne Ivey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hill v. Aramark, LLC et al
as 8:2023cv00026
Plaintiff:
Tony L. Hill
Defendant:
Aramark, LLC, Zephyrhills Correctional Institution and H. Pierre
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barrington v. Ivey et al
as 6:2022cv02434
Plaintiff:
Arnaz V. Barrington, Jr.
Defendant:
Wayne Ivey, Chief Singletary, FL Dept of Health and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hester v. Aramark et al
as 6:2022cv02435
Plaintiff:
Carlos Hester
Defendant:
Aramark, Florida Dept of Health, Wayne Ivey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hill et al v. Ms. Valdez et al
as 8:2022cv02856
Plaintiff:
Tony L. Hill, Clifford E. Gaynor, Russell E. Lee and others
Defendant:
Ms. Valdez, Warden Roger Hester, Ms. H. Pierre and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pelletier v. Aramark et al
as 6:2022cv02319
Plaintiff:
Roland Pelletier
Defendant:
Aramark, Yes Care, Singletary and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pelletier v. Aramark et al
as 2:2022cv00787
Plaintiff:
Roland Pelletier
Defendant:
Aramark, Yes Care, Singletary and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SCOTT v. ARAMARK
as 3:2022cv22212
Plaintiff:
TYLER ROBERT SCOTT
Defendant:
ARA MARK and ARAMARK
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
