Cases 1 - 10 of 24
Goodrich v. City of Marion, Ohio et al.
as 3:2023cv02201
Plaintiff:
Donald Goodrich
Defendant:
City of Marion, Ohio, Austin Ray, Nicholas Kalb and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Sherry Wiley v. Brian Moynihan, et al
as 22-3812
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SHERRY ANN WILEY
Defendant / Appellee:
BRIAN T. MOYNIHAN, Bank of America CEO, RICHARD RIVERS, Branch Manager, TAYLOR STEPHENSON, Relationship Manager and Business Owner Specialist and others
Wiley v. Moynihan et al
as 5:2022cv01293
Plaintiff:
Sherry Ann Wiley
Defendant:
Brian T. Moynihan, Bank of America Corporation, Bank of America Corporation Center and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00167
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
DEEM, LLC v. Kroger Limited Partnership I et al
as 3:2021cv00033
Plaintiff:
DEEM, LLC
Defendant:
ImageOne Industries, LLC and Kroger Limited Partnership I
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
GAR Disability Advocates, LLC v. Deem et al
as 0:2018cv00063
Defendant:
Miranda Deem, Erica Dougherty, Pamela Hofer and others
Plaintiff:
GAR Disability Advocates, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Moshir v. Minehart et al
as 4:2017cv01458
Plaintiff:
Ali Moshir
Defendant:
Minehart, Warden, NEOCC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Deem v. Carney
as 3:2016cv02490
Plaintiff:
Scott Leo Deem
Defendant:
John W. Carney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McCormick et al v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv02113
Plaintiff:
Melanie McCormick and Naomi Deem
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Deem v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv02023
Plaintiff:
Cathy Jane Deem
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
