Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Lamb et al v. City of Tulsa, Oklahoma et al
as 4:2026cv00573
Plaintiff:
Joshua D Lamb, Matthew C Lay, Eric D Acosta and others
Defendant:
City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, Monroe Nichols, Mike Miller and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Goff v. The City of Tulsa, et al
as 26-5117
Plaintiff:
COURTNEY GOFF
Defendant:
THE CITY OF TULSA, TIMOTHY MARLER, SERGEANT BROWN and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 26-5105
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Blackwell v. Housing Authority of the City of Tulsa
as 4:2026cv00454
Defendant:
Housing Authority of the City of Tulsa and Tulsa Housing Authority
Plaintiff:
Whitney Blackwell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Garrett v. Universal Protection Service, LP et al
as 4:2026cv00422
Plaintiff:
Mitchell Garrett
Defendant:
Universal Protection Service, LP doing business as Allied Universal Security Services, City of Tulsa, Weston Hardin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Reape v. City of Tulsa, Oklahoma et al
as 4:2026cv00391
Plaintiff:
Shyrone Furman Reape
Defendant:
City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, Dakota C McCaleb, Cody J Riley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hankins v. Ehrenrich, et al
as 26-5072
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY HANKINS, JR.
Defendant:
DARIN EHRENRICH and CITY OF TULSA
Drew v. City of Tulsa, Oklahoma et al
as 4:2026cv00141
Plaintiff:
Marlon Drew
Defendant:
City of Tulsa, Oklahoma and Tyler Hoftender
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Johnson-Hinds v. USCIS et al
as 4:2026cv00126
Plaintiff:
Jordan Nathaniel Johnson-Hinds
Defendant:
USCIS, Jerald Fritz and City of Tulsa
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Simmons v. Howse et al
as 4:2026cv00117
Defendant:
Darin Howse and City of Tulsa
Plaintiff:
Keri Simmons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
