Cases 81 - 90 of 21,816
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00489
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Starlette Thompson et al v. County of Riverside et al
as 5:2024cv00822
Plaintiff:
Starlette Thompson and Patrina Holloway
Defendant:
County of Riverside, San Bernardino Dept of Public Social Sevices, Child Protective Services and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander
GOMEZ v. MARSHALL
as 1:2024cv00670
Plaintiff:
LUIS GOMEZ
Defendant:
L MARSHALL ID # 44402
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ketzbeau v. Ivy et al
as 4:2024cv11006
Plaintiff:
Jesse I Ketzbeau
Defendant:
Curtis Ivy, Jr., Frances K. Behm, Nancy Abraham and others
MARSHALL v. EVESHAM TOWNSHIP SCHOOL DISTRICT et al
as 1:2024cv05186
Plaintiff:
ERIC MARSHALL
Defendant:
Evesham Township School District and RICHARD DANTINNE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Love v. Flowers et al
as 5:2024cv00074
Plaintiff:
Jerry Dean Love
Defendant:
Brandon S. Flowers A.U.S.A., F.C.I Hazelton Warden Rey, F.C.I. Hazelton S.I.S. Marshall and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Marshall v. Indivior, Inc. et al.
as 1:2024sf65259
Plaintiff:
Daniel J. Marshall
Defendant:
Indivior, Inc., Indivior Solutions, Inc., Indivior PLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Alan Kapilow v. Marshall Field et al
as 2:2024cv03105
Plaintiff:
Alan Kapilow
Petitioner:
Marshall Field
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Marshall v. Vaughn et al
as 9:2024cv00527
Plaintiff:
James D. Marshall
Defendant:
Officer Vaughn, Parole Officer Kevin Harmer, Cosgrove and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hagan v. U.S. Marshal
as 1:2024cv02897
Plaintiff:
Christopher Hagan
Defendant:
U.S. Marshal
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.
