Cases 1 - 10 of 38
Anesha Parker v. Roseberte Clervil, et al
as 24-11293
Plaintiff:
ANESHA PARKER
Defendant:
ROSEBERTE CLERVIL, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv23309
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2023cv00031
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 22-14341
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cantrell v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2022cv00317
Plaintiff:
Harvey Cantrell
Defendant:
Kilolo Kijakazi and Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402 Social Security Benefits
Shekinah El v. Terry Rhodes, et al
as 22-11364
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SYTERIA HEPHZIBAH
Defendant / Appellee:
TERRY L. RHODES, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY and EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES
Edwin Guzman v. Ann Coffman, et al
as 22-11168
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWIN BERRIOS GUZMAN
Defendant / Appellee:
ANN COFFMAN, Program Director Dept. of Revenue, CHRISTY C. COLLINS, Circuit Court Judge, SHEVAUN HARRIS, Office of the Secretary DCF and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00122
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Not Classified By Court:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2022cv00535
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
El v. Rhodes et al
as 8:2022cv00094
Plaintiff:
Highly Favored Shekinah El
Defendant:
Terry L. Rhodes, Kilolo Kijakazi and Commissioner of Social Security
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.
