Cases 11 - 20 of 22
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv01183
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
MUNSON v. THE 23RD & 24TH ORGEN SHOPPING PLAZA BURGER KING et al
as 2:2015cv01496
Plaintiff:
PAUL MUNSON
Defendant:
THE 23RD & 24TH ORGEN SHOPPING PLAZA BURGER KING, KICKS USA, MODELS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv06644
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
MORALES v. CARROLS CORPORATION et al
as 5:2013cv05979
Plaintiff:
SHARELIS MORALES
Defendant:
CARROLS CORPORATION, BURGER KING, LEWIS TAMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
INGRAM v. BURGER KING et al
as 2:2013cv05069
Plaintiff:
RICKY JEROME INGRAM
Defendant:
BURGER KING and JESSICA (EMPLOYEE)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv00915
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv01555
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
WELTER et al v. BURGER KING CORPORATION et al
as 2:2010cv01526
Plaintiff:
JEAN WELTER and ROBERT WELTER
Defendant:
BURGER KING CORPORATION , BURGER KING OF PA & NJ, INC. and CARROLS CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
GOODWIN v. BURGER KING CORPORATION et al
as 1:2010cv00023
Plaintiff:
GLENN GOODWIN
Defendant:
BURGER KING CORPORATION, BURGER KING CORPORATION, JOHN DOE NO. 1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Civil Rights: Other
HYDUK v. K.B. OF CASTOR AVE. et al
as 2:2009cv02485
Plaintiff:
WALTER HYDUK
Defendant:
K.B. OF CASTOR AVE., BURGER KING and RICHARD SHAW
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
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.
