Cases 1 - 10 of 100
BLISS v. ARAMARK et al
as 5:2026cv00187
Plaintiff:
KEVIN W BLISS
Defendant:
ARAMARK and BERGERON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv03986
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Johnson v. Glover et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2026cv00545
Plaintiff:
Charla Johnson
Defendant:
Enri Glover and Aramark
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Overly v. Fort Bend County, Texas et al
as 4:2026cv05204
Plaintiff:
Jon Overly
Defendant:
Fort Bend County, Texas, Eric Fagan, Aramark Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Griggs v. Prummell et al
as 2:2026cv02099
Plaintiff:
Glenn A Griggs
Defendant:
Sheriff William G Prummell, Charlotte County Sheriff's Office and Aramark Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McBride v. Woods et al
as 1:2026cv07588
Plaintiff:
Robert Travon McBride
Defendant:
Bill Woods, J. Bredlau, S. McKanna and others
:
Service List
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Aramark Facility Services, LLC
as 6:2026cv00414
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Johnson
Defendant:
Aramark Facility Services, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 754 Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv05490
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e-2e Job Discrimination (Unlawful Employment Practices)
BIRCHFIELD v. GARDNER et al
as 1:2026cv01355
Plaintiff:
SKIELIER D. BIRCHFIELD, SR.
Defendant:
DELANA GARDNER and ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rauch v. Robinson et al
as 5:2026cv06103
Plaintiff:
Michael Rauch
Defendant:
Abigail Robinson, Nikki Oaks, Michele Moore 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.
