Cases 61 - 70 of 2,422
Gentry v. Wal Mart Stores East, LP
as 1:2023cv01267
Plaintiff:
Trenisha Gentry
Defendant:
Wal Mart Stores East, LP
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Gentry, James v. Florida Department of Corrections
as 0:2024cv60115
Plaintiff:
James Gentry
Defendant:
Florida Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gentry et al v. Memphis Bell Transportation, LLC et al
as 3:2023cv00475
Plaintiff:
Shawn Gentry, Hoa Nguyen, Thao Nguyen and others
Defendant:
Memphis Bell Transportation, LLC and Robinson Property Group, LLC doing business as Horseshoe Tunica
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Timothy Gentry v. Randall Hepp
as 23-3321
Petitioner / Appellant:
TIMOTHY B. GENTRY
Respondent / Appellee:
RANDALL HEPP
Gentry v. Rincones et al
as 9:2023cv07045
Plaintiff:
Rex A. Gentry
Defendant:
Paul Daniel Rincones and National OnDemand, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence
Gentry v. Arietis Health, LLC
as 1:2023cv13019
Plaintiff:
Charles Gentry
Defendant:
Arietis Health, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02759
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv06220
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Whittenburg v. Lake County Jail et al
as 2:2023cv00411
Plaintiff:
Garrett Whittenburg
Defendant:
Lake County Jail, Warden, Ramirez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Cullman County Jail
as 5:2023cv01566
Plaintiff:
Mark Ples Jones
Defendant:
Cullman County Jail, Matt Gentry, Kelly Allen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
