Cases 61 - 70 of 49,560
Duffy v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
as 6:2024cv00760
Plaintiff:
Richard P. Duffy
Defendant:
Commissioner Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1383 Review of HHS Decision
Mitchell v. Kott et al
as 6:2024cv00484
Plaintiff:
Jeannene Mitchell
Defendant:
Shelly Kott, US Bancorp, Sharon Kott Prosise and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Eisele v. Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc.
as 3:2024cv00764
Plaintiff:
Kathleen Eisele
Defendant:
Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Taylor v. Immergut
as 2:2024cv00762
Plaintiff:
Jermel Arcilicia Taylor
Defendant:
Karin J. Immergut
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
S.Q. v. Echtenkamp et al
as 3:2024cv00448
Plaintiff:
S. Q.
Defendant:
Emily Echtenkamp, Loren Calkins, Juan Chavez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Clingman v. Washington County Sherriff's Dept.
as 3:2024cv00446
Plaintiff:
Jeremy Clingman
Defendant:
Washington County Sherriff's Dept.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Foshee v. Lane County et al
as 6:2024cv00447
Plaintiff:
P.R. Penny Foshee and Penny Foshee
Defendant:
Lane County, Attorney General Ellen F Rosenblum, Director Betsy Imholt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Davis, Jr. v. Safeway, Inc.
as 3:2024cv00455
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Davis, Jr.
Defendant:
Safeway Inc. and Safeway, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
White v. Coffman et al
as 3:2024cv00755
Plaintiff:
David White
Defendant:
Dave Coffman, Mark Bransom and Klamath River Renewal Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Scott Management, LLC v. Silva et al
as 3:2024cv00752
Plaintiff:
Scott Management, LLC
Defendant:
Troy Silva and Maria Silva
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
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.
