Cases 1 - 10 of 28
Powell v. City of McComb
as 5:2024cv00098
Plaintiff:
Steve M. Powell
Defendant:
City of McComb
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00056
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Smith v. City of McComb City Police Department
as 5:2024cv00057
Plaintiff:
Markez Delmont Smith
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Defendant:
City of McComb City Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. City of McComb Police Department
as 5:2024cv00041
Plaintiff:
Markez Smith
Defendant:
City of McComb Police Department
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Varaksa v. City of McComb et al
as 5:2023cv00080
Plaintiff:
Anthony A. Varaksa
Defendant:
City of McComb, McComb Police Department and John Does 1-7
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Disability Rights Mississippi v. McComb School District et al
as 5:2022cv00091
Plaintiff:
Disability Rights Mississippi
Defendant:
McComb School District and The City of McComb
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Nordstrom v. City of McComb et al
as 5:2022cv00077
Plaintiff:
Rodney Nordstrom
Defendant:
City of McComb, McComb Police Department and John Does 1-7
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal
Hudson Spclty Ins v. Talex Enterprises
as 21-60794
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Hudson Specialty Insurance Company
Defendant / Appellant:
Talex Enterprises, L.L.C.
Appellant:
City of McComb
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2019cv00141
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2019cv00076
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
