Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Pattison v. Tolotti, et al.
as 26-5600
Plaintiff:
DANTE PATTISON
Defendant:
TOLOTTI, CRYSTAL PADILLA, ELAIN and others
Ramakrishnan v. Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. et al
as 1:2026cv06566
Plaintiff:
Urmila Ramakrishnan
Defendant:
Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. doing business as Cond Nast, Binta Diallo, Michael Jorge and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 FMLA: Family and Medical Leave Act (Findings and Purposes)
HAIRSTON v. MAYNARD et al
as 2:2026cv05136
Plaintiff:
DENNIS ALLEN HAIRSTON
Defendant:
LIEUTENANT P. MAYNARD, OFFICER J. EXUME, DOCTOR JAGODA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Exum et al v. Vaco Holdings, LLC et al
as 2:2026cv02724
Plaintiff:
Jacquline D Exum and Pierre L Knox
Defendant:
Vaco Holdings, LLC and United of Omaha Life Insurance Co.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Exum v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Co. et al
as 2:2026cv02718
Plaintiff:
Jacquline D Exum
Defendant:
United of Omaha Life Insurance Co. and Vaco Holding, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 26-1612
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Exume v. Tampa Family Health Centers, Inc.
as 8:2026cv00847
Plaintiff:
Caprice Exume
Defendant:
Tampa Family Health Centers, Inc.
Pretrial Service:
Jason O'Steen
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601 Family Medical Leave Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2026cv00438
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Dante Pattison v. Tolotti et al
as 3:2026cv00107
Plaintiff:
Dante Pattison
Defendant:
Tolotti, Crystal Padilla, Elain and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 26-1178
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
