Cases 41 - 50 of 3,664
HUMPHREY v. MOODY et al
as 7:2024cv00006
Plaintiff:
GREGORY HUMPHREY
Defendant:
JAMES MOODY, ASHLEY KERN and RODNEY FOULKS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CRANE v. CLARK et al
as 5:2024cv00018
Plaintiff:
AMY CRANE
Defendant:
SARAH CLARK, BRANDI CUNNINGHAM and ASHLEY SLAUGHTER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
DEESE v. POWELL et al
as 5:2024cv00061
Plaintiff:
KADY DEESE
Defendant:
Deputy RYAN POWELL and Corporal ANDREW GUNN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00016
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
PORTER et al v. CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT OF COLUMBUS GEORGIA et al
as 4:2024cv00014
Plaintiff:
Clarence Nash and Tonyaneka Porter
Defendant:
CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT OF COLUMBUS GEORGIA, Luis Morales, Jr. and LUIS MORALES, JR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00007
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family and Medical Leave Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00033
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
ROSE-BURRELL v. CITY OF MONROE et al
as 3:2024cv00011
Plaintiff:
LALLYMAY ROSE-BURREL
Defendant:
CITY OF MONROE, NICHOLAS SILVERBERG and OFFICER RYAN GEE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
GRAHAM v. CRISP REGIONAL HOSPITAL
as 1:2024cv00005
Plaintiff:
HILDA GRAHAM
Defendant:
CRISP REGIONAL HOSPITAL, PAVEL BOMAR, MARISSA BROWN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
EUBANKS v. WAL-MART STORES EAST LP et al
as 3:2024cv00005
Plaintiff:
BECKY L EUBANKS
Defendant:
WAL-MART STORES EAST LP and WALMART INC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Non-Motor Vehicle
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.
