Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Rutledge v. Federal Express Corporation
as 1:2026cv11075
Plaintiff:
Deshaun Rutledge
Defendant:
Federal Express Corporation
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
RUTLEDGE v. W.F. et al
as 1:2026cv00893
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER R. RUTLEDGE
Defendant:
W.F., STEPHANIE WILKERSON-YODER, IMAGINE ONE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Terry D. Rutledge v. Zachariah Estes, et al
as 26-2787
Plaintiff:
TERRY D. RUTLEDGE
Defendant:
ZACHARIAH ESTES, Officer, JOSHUA THOMAS, Sergeant and JOSHUA SNOW, Officer
Rutledge v. City of Bakersfield
as 1:2026cv06834
Plaintiff:
Joseph Rutledge
Defendant:
City of Bakersfield
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv04817
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Rutledge v. Director Hill Finklea Detention Center
as 8:2026cv03656
Petitioner:
Gary Rutledge
Respondent:
Director Hill Finklea Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gary Rutledge v. Warden of Berkley County Detention Center
as 26-6900
Petitioner:
GARY TYRONE RUTLEDGE
Respondent:
WARDEN OF BERKLEY COUNTY DETENTION CENTER
Gary Rutledge v. Aaron Gauge
as 26-6901
Plaintiff:
GARY TYRONE RUTLEDGE
Defendant:
AARON GAUGE, Sinkler Bail Bondsman, Shelmore LLC and STACEY BEAM, Owner, Coastal Carolina Monitoring Service
Stiltner v. Sevier County, Tennessee et al
as 3:2026cv00393
Plaintiff:
Brandy Stiltner
Defendant:
Sevier County, Tennessee, Michael R. Hodges, Jr., Steve Layman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
SYKES v. JONES et al
as 1:2026cv01696
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL RAY SYKES, JR.
Defendant:
JONES, SERVER, BRYAN VANDERVORT 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.
