Cases 61 - 70 of 80
Woolery v. Geithner
as 4:2012cv00284
Plaintiff:
Barbara J Woolery
Defendant:
Timothy F. Geithner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Sangraal et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al
as 4:2011cv04884
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Sangraal and Catherine Jones
Defendant:
City and County of San Francisco , Maria Elena Martinez , Brandi Woolery and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mikich et al v. County of San Francisco et al
as 4:2011cv04629
Plaintiff:
Charles Mikich and Alexis Mikich
Defendant:
County of San Francisco , Bonnie Dickerson , Dan Phillips and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Mark Hays v. Officer Shane Anderson, et al
as 10-35124
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK ALAN HAYS
Defendant - Appellee:
OFFICER SHANE ANDERSON, Seattle Police Dept., OFFICER THOMAS HANLEY, Seattle Police Dept., OFFICER JONATHAN HUBER, Seattle Police Dept. and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 09-3782
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Gipson v. Nixon et al
as 2:2009cv04136
Plaintiff:
Robert Gipson
Defendant:
Jay Nixon, Ronald Levy, James Harrison and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
May v. City of Seattle et al
as 2:2009cv00892
Plaintiff:
Judith C May
Defendant:
City of Seattle, S Sanchez, R Woolery and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv05912
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Hays v. Anderson et al
as 2:2009cv00098
Plaintiff:
Mark Allen Hays
Defendant:
Shane Anderson, Thomas Hanley, Jonathan Huber and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Olier v. Woolery, et al.
as 5:2008cv00282
Plaintiff:
Stephen Olier and Stephen Olier
Defendant:
James C. Woolery and Wayne Woolery
Cause Of Action: Diversity
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.
