Cases 1 - 10 of 65
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv11209
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
HICKMOTT v. ARAMARK
as 2:2023cv10835
Plaintiff:
WENDY HICKMOTT
Defendant:
ARAMARK
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Dzinic et al v. Aramark Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv10413
Plaintiff:
Sabina Dzinic and Adnan Dzinic
Defendant:
ARAMARK SERVICES INC., Dale Roe, Total Vending and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv12432
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Hale v. Young et al
as 1:2021cv00623
Plaintiff:
Thomas A. Hale
Defendant:
Michael Young, Vital Core Health Stratagies, Unknown Party and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Twin City Fire Insurance Company, an Indiana corporation v. ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC
as 2:2020cv10637
Plaintiff:
Twin City Fire Insurance Company, an Indiana corporation
Defendant:
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hanover Insurance Group, Inc., as Subrogee of SWCC LLC v. ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC
as 2:2020cv10236
Defendant:
ARAMARK Refreshment Services, LLC
Plaintiff:
Hanover Insurance Group, Inc., as Subrogee of SWCC LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv10878
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185
WELCH v. Whole Foods Market, Inc. et al
as 2:2019cv10021
Defendant:
AUS DETROIT MICHIGAN, Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel, LLC, ARAMARK SERVICES INC. and others
Plaintiff:
MELANIE WELCH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Alger v. ECF Dentist et al
as 4:2018cv13280
Defendant:
Richard D. Russell, Aramark, ECF Dentist and others
Plaintiff:
Joshua Alger
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.
