Cases 31 - 40 of 62
Inter Contiential Logistics, Inc. v. United Parcel Service Inc et al
as 2:2016cv01046
Plaintiff:
Inter Contiential Logistics, Inc.
Defendant:
United Parcel Service Inc and Adam Landers
Miscellaneou:
Ed Pulliam
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Inter Contiential Logistics, Inc. v. United Parcel Service Inc et al
as 1:2016cv01046
Plaintiff:
Inter Contiential Logistics, Inc.
Defendant:
United Parcel Service Inc and Adam Landers
Miscellaneou:
Ed Pulliam
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Anderson v. United Parcel Service, Inc. et al
as 3:2016cv00040
Plaintiff:
Talyon Anderson
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc., Jeff Bloedorn and Ken Harms
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv02134
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Miscellaneou:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Siecienski v. Rowe et al
as 1:2014cv01238
Plaintiff:
Ignatius Siecienski
Defendant:
Eric Trent Rowe and United Parcel Service, Inc.
Miscellaneou:
Danny Tanner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Bowling et al v. United Parcel Service, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv00270
Plaintiff:
Kevin Bowling and Pam Bowling
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc. and Estate of James B. Tacy, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2014cv01774
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv02505
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Tiemens v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
as 3:2014cv00912
Plaintiff:
Myron F. Tiemens, Jr.
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv01291
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Miscellaneou:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
