Cases 1 - 10 of 2,740
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01745
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
David Rodriguez v. Genuine Parts Company et al
as 5:2024cv00831
Plaintiff:
David Rodriguez
Defendant:
Genuine Parts Company a Georgia corporation doing business as NAPA Auto Parts and Does 1-50, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Labor/Mgmnt. Relations
David Rodriguez v. Genuine Parts Company et al
as 2:2024cv03204
Plaintiff:
David Rodriguez
Defendant:
Genuine Parts Company dba NAPA Auto Parts
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00720
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02137
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00763
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Caplan v. MD USED AUTO PARTS INC. et al
as 1:2024cv20979
Plaintiff:
Howard Michael Caplan
Defendant:
MD USED AUTO PARTS INC. and 72 STREET INVESTMENT LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12182 Americans with Disabilities Act
Simpson v. Advanced Auto Parts, Inc.
as 2:2024cv10650
Plaintiff:
Douglas Simpson
Defendant:
Advanced Auto Parts, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Linden v. Advance Auto Parts, Inc. et al
as 5:2024cv00118
Plaintiff:
KAMA LINDEN
Defendant:
Advance Auto Parts, Inc., Carla J. Bailo, John F. Ferraro and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
Gervat v. Bailo et al
as 5:2024cv00097
Plaintiff:
Hugues Gervat
Defendant:
Carla J. Bailo, John F. Ferraro, Joan M. Hilson and others
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.
