Cases 1 - 10 of 26
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00244
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00409
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Armstrong v. City of Rocky Mount et al
as 5:2020cv00332
Plaintiff:
Arthur O. Armstrong
Defendant:
OIC Medical Center and City of Rocky Mount
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
American Lighting and Signalization, LLC v. City of Rocky Mount
as 5:2020cv00168
Plaintiff:
American Lighting and Signalization, LLC
Defendant:
City of Rocky Mount
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330
Cox v. Lamm et al
as 4:2020cv00052
Defendant:
The City of Rocky Mount, North Carolina, FORMER POLICE CHIEF JAMES MOORE, POLICE CHIEF GEORGE D. ROBINSON and others
Plaintiff:
HAROLD COX
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fields v. The City of Rocky Mount et al
as 5:2017ct03270
Plaintiff:
Irvin Jermain Fields
Defendant:
The City of Rocky Mount, Officer Robinson and Officer Western
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
American Entertainers, L.L.C. v. City of Rocky Mount, NC
as 17-1577
Plaintiff - Appellant:
AMERICAN ENTERTAINERS, L.L.C., d/b/a Gentleman's Playground, a North Carolina limited liability company
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF ROCKY MOUNT
Lewis v. Bent, et al
as 4:2016cv00079
Plaintiff:
Sidney Lewis, Jr.
Defendant:
Brenton Bent , Jonathan L. Boone , City of Rocky Mount, North Carolina and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dyson v. City of Rocky Mount, et al
as 5:2015cv00086
Plaintiff:
Aaron Purnell Dyson
Defendant:
City of Rocky Mount and Rocky Mount Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Wardrett v. City of Rocky Mount North Carolina, et al
as 5:2014cv00854
Plaintiff:
Caleb Wardrett
Defendant:
John Doe I, John Doe II, John Doe III and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
