Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Ronald Emrit v. University of Virginia Darden School of Business, et al
as 23-2855
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RONALD SATISH EMRIT
Defendant / Appellee:
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA DARDEN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, ADAMS & GARTH, Staffing Agency, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, (NAACP) and others
EMRIT v. UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA DARDEN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS et al
as 2:2023cv01405
Plaintiff:
RONALD SATISH EMRIT
Defendant:
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA DARDEN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, ADAMS & GARTH, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE (NAACP) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Emrit v. University of Virginia Darden School of Business et al
as 1:2023cv00403
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emrit
Defendant:
University of Virginia Darden School of Business, Adams & Garth, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
Alston et al v. The Democratic Republic of America of the United States of America et al
as 1:2021cv00681
Defendant:
Joe Biden, The Democratic Republic of America of the United States of America, The Acting Chief Federal Coordinator of Coordination of The US Department of Justice Compliance Section Civil Rights Division and others
Plaintiff:
Chris Miller, EShed Alston and Ronnier Henry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jack Allen v. USA, et al
as 17-2125
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JACK E. ALLEN
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, SOLICITOR GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and others
GREENBERG v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2007cv03664
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW GREENBERG
Defendant:
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION, MARK J. KAPPELHOFF and others
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.
