Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Baldwin v. City of Tacoma
as 3:2026cv05991
Plaintiff:
Andrew Baldwin
Defendant:
City of Tacoma
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv05721
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
City of Tacoma v. REV Group LLC et al
as 1:2026cv01106
Plaintiff:
City of Tacoma
Defendant:
KME RE Holdings LLC, American Industrial Partners Capital Fund IV LP, Oshkosh Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15 Antitrust Litigation
Shakir v. Jonathon, et al.
as 26-3504
Plaintiff:
ZAKEE SHAKIR
Defendant:
DOUGLES JONATHON, Tacoma Police Officer and CITY OF TACOMA, A Municipal Corporation
El v. Pierce County Washington et al
as 3:2026cv05555
Plaintiff:
Idris Ali El
Defendant:
Pierce County Washington, Ed Troyer, Naphcare Inc LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01486
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv05449
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
City of Bothell, et al. v. Turner, et al.
as 26-1689
Plaintiff:
CITY OF BOTHELL, CITY OF OLYMPIA, CITY OF CINCINNATI and others
Defendant:
SCOTT TURNER, Secretary, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, MATTHEW WELBES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT and others
Williams v. City of Tacoma, et al.
as 25-8168
Plaintiff:
TAVON WILLIAMS
Defendant:
CITY OF TACOMA, KHANH PHAN and JOHN AND JANE DOES, Officers
Leach v. City of Tacoma, et al.
as 25-8171
Plaintiff:
IAN LEACH
Defendant:
CITY OF TACOMA, KHANH PHAN and JOHN AND JANE DOES
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.
