Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv12558
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Broadhead v. Barnes et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2026cv00608
Plaintiff:
James M. Broadhead
Defendant:
Antonio Barnes, Lieutenant Robinson, Officer Giles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barnes v. Jarrett et al
as 4:2026cv00372
Petitioner:
Jamar Deontae Barnes
Respondent:
J Jarrett and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Barnes v. NYU Winthrop Langone Hospital
as 26-2001
Plaintiff:
SUZANNE BARNES
Defendant:
NYU LANGONE HOSPITAL - LONG ISLAND
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2026cv00352
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Barnes, et al v. General Motors LLC
as 2:2026cv01616
Plaintiff:
Johnny R Barnes
Defendant:
General Motors LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Jacobs et al v. Gainer et al
as 1:2026cv02038
Plaintiff:
Andre Jacobs and Saysha Barnes
Defendant:
Ben Gainer, Global Tel Link Corporation d/b/a via Path Technologies and Warden Gregory Briggs
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas v. City of Riverdale et al
as 1:2026cv04102
Defendant:
Government Tax Solutions, City of Riverdale, Evelyn Wynn Dixon and others
Plaintiff:
Keith Thomas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Domenic Rolak v. Bureau of Prisons and its agents
as 26-6786
Plaintiff:
DOMENIC DANIEL ROLAK
Defendant:
BUREAU OF PRISONS, AND ITS AGENTS, WARDEN BROWN, OF GILMER FCI, SHU LIEUTENANT ATKINS and others
Vanicor v. Barnes Transportation
as 26-30441
Plaintiff:
Dennis W. Vanicor and Sheila A. Vanicor
Defendant:
Barnes Transportation Services, Incorporated and Keith Barnes, Individually
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.
