Cases 11 - 20 of 149
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00613
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00584
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
ARAYA v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2023cv00145
Plaintiff:
ISAAK SIMON ARAYA
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Auto Negligence
DICKSON v. BISNOTT et al
as 1:2022cv03047
Plaintiff:
SIMONE DICKSON
Defendant:
BRITTANY BISNOTT and KAMALA HARRIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
DICKSON v. VANHOUSEN et al
as 1:2022cv02731
Plaintiff:
SIMONE DICKSON
Defendant:
MR. & MRS. VANHOUSEN, REBECCA LAURALIE KIRCHMAN, SCHENECTADY COUNTY JAIL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
DICKSON v. MELIUS et al
as 1:2022cv02363
Plaintiff:
SIMONE DICKSON
Defendant:
DAVID MELIUS, CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVCIES, DEANNA ROBERTS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
KINSELLA v. BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT et al
as 1:2022cv02147
Plaintiff:
SIMON V. KINSELLA
Defendant:
BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT, DEB HAALAND and MICHAEL S. REGAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment
ENLOP v. HAKE et al
as 1:2022cv01831
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA JAMES ENLOP
Defendant:
JEFF HAKE, CHRIS CLASS, SIMONS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES INC. v. WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP et al
as 1:2022mc00047
Petitioner:
PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES INC.
Respondent:
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP, BARRY S. SIMON and STEPHEN L. WOHLGEMUTH
DICKSON v. KING
as 1:2022cv01053
Plaintiff:
SIMONE DICKSON
Defendant:
RANDY KING
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
