Cases 31 - 40 of 363
DAVIS v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv21408
Plaintiff:
LASH JERRY DAVIS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
John Ray v. CLH New York Ave, LLC, et al
as 22-7137
Plaintiff / Appellant:
John L. Ray
Defendant / Appellee:
CLH New York Ave, LLC, Richard Cohen, Donnie Hinton and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2022cv02903
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv04798
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1201 Civil Rights (Disability)
Montique v. Lilly Lashes, LLC
as 0:2022cv61468
Plaintiff:
Khalia Montique
Defendant:
Lilly Lashes, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv05831
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12132 Americans with Disabilities Act - Discrimination
Sarr v. Sinergia, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv03610
Plaintiff:
Adam Sarr
Defendant:
Sinergia, Inc. and Donald Lash
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Boards of Trustees of the Ohio Laborers Benefits v. Lash Industries, Inc.
as 2:2022cv02095
Plaintiff:
Boards of Trustees of the Ohio Laborers Benefits
Defendant:
Lash Industries, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Guan v. Lash Princess 56 Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv02552
Plaintiff:
Liling Guan
Defendant:
Lash Princess 56 Inc. agent of d/b/a Lash Princess agent of d/b/a Lash Princess 56, Oscar Lin, Qinyu Liu and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv01839
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
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.
