Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2025cv00469
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Baker et al v. Lind et al
as 1:2023cv00321
Plaintiff:
David Baker and Elijah Bright
Defendant:
Christopher Lind and David Schofield
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Andrew Mitchell, et al v. Cty of Cincinnati, OH, et al
as 21-4061
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANDREW MITCHELL and DAVID SCHOFIELD
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF CINCINNATI, OH and MAYOR JOHN CRANLEY
Intervenor / Appellee:
BRIAN NORRIS
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv00626
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SCHOFIELD v. GREAT LAKES INSURANCE SE
as 3:2021cv00364
Defendant:
GREAT LAKES INSURANCE SE
Plaintiff:
DAVID SCHOFIELD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Schofield v. Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.
as 3:2019cv02360
Petitioner:
James David Schofield, III
Respondent:
Raymond James Financial Services Inc and Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 9 U.S.C. § 9
Perry v. Corrections Corporation of America et al
as 3:2018cv00540
Defendant:
Morgan County Correctional Complex, Bill Haslam, Aramark Indestry Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Courtney Perry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Perry v. Corrections Corporation of America et al
as 3:2018cv01296
Defendant:
Morgan County Correctional Complex, Bill Haslam, Aramark Indestry Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Courtney Perry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv00354
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv00601
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection 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.
