Cases 1 - 10 of 50
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00325
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Wood et al v. Mutual Redevelopment Houses, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv09493
Plaintiff:
Tzvee Wood, Andrea Malester and Alexis Gottschalk
Defendant:
Mutual Redevelopment Houses, Inc., The City of New York, Eric Adams and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00037
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 2:2020cv19958
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Whalen et al v. Morice et al
as 2:2020cv01265
Defendant:
City of New Orleans Police Department, Gerald A. Turlich, Jr., Mark E. Morice and others
Plaintiff:
Ladner's Industries, Sarah A Whalen, Theodore Ladner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Spizer v. Morice et al
as 2:2020cv01266
Plaintiff:
David Bruce Spizer
Defendant:
Gilsbar, L.L.C., Morice Law Firm, LLC, Mark E. Morice and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McFadden v. CNA Financial Corporation d/b/a Continental Casualty Company
as 1:2019cv07449
Plaintiff:
Daintry McFadden
Defendant:
CNA Financial Corporation d/b/a Continental Casualty Company
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Unknown v. Unknown
as 1:2019cv07450
Plaintiff:
Daintry McFadden and CNA Financial Corporation d/b/a Continental Casualty Company
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv05741
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv00469
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
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.
