Cases 31 - 40 of 471
Howell, Jr. v. Simon et al
as 9:2023cv00007
Plaintiff:
Cecil Howell, Jr.
Defendant:
Darra Simon, Sean B. Bridges, Michael A. Byerly and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Philips North America LLC v. Atlas Comprehensive Technical Services Inc. et al
as 3:2023cv00040
Plaintiff:
PHILIPS NORTH AMERICA LLC
Defendant:
Atlas Comprehensive Technical Services Inc. and Simon Martinez
Incorrectly Filed
as 4:2023cv00521
Plaintiff:
Simone Duncan and Incorrectly Filed
Defendant:
Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 88 U.S.C. § 8888 Other Statutory Actions
Henningan v. Schindler Elevator Corporation et al
as 4:2023cv00366
Plaintiff:
UFALLER HENNINGAN
Defendant:
Schindler Elevator Corporation, Simon Property Group (Texas) L.P. and HG GALLERIA LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Simon v. Shell Exploration & Production Company
as 4:2022cv04459
Plaintiff:
JARROD SIMON
Defendant:
Shell Exploration & Production Company
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination
Simone v. Porter
as 4:2022cv04511
Plaintiff:
Dinamarie Simone
Defendant:
Bryan Kevin Porter, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
Dekerf v. Behringer
as 3:2022cv02667
Plaintiff:
Simon Dekerf
Defendant:
Derek Behringer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Howell, Jr. v. Bridges et al
as 9:2022cv00161
Plaintiff:
Cecil Howell, Jr.
Defendant:
Sean B. Bridges, Michael A. Byerly, Jr., John D. Lackey II and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Simons v. Kayden Industries (USA), Inc.
as 4:2022cv00039
Plaintiff:
Joseph Simons
Defendant:
Kayden Industries (USA), Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Riley v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 6:2022cv00058
Petitioner:
Simon Lee Riley
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
