Cases 1 - 10 of 20
Henry James v. H-Mart Northwest Headquarters Office, et al
as 23-35214
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HENRY JAMES
Defendant / Appellee:
H-MART NORTHWEST HEADQUARTERS OFFICE and OHHYUK KWON, Employee
James v. H-Mart Northwest Headquarters Office et al
as 2:2023cv00242
Plaintiff:
Henry James
Defendant:
H-Mart Northwest Headquarters Office and Ohhyuk Kwon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Civil Rights Violation (Excess Force)
HOLMES v. JOHN DOE, et al
as 2:2022cv01342
Plaintiff:
HENRY JAMES HOLMES
Defendant:
UNKNOWN, PITTSBURG PORT AUTHORITY and JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Donald Nash, et al v. Henry Folsom, et al
as 22-2860
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Donald R. Nash and Theresa Nash
Defendant / Appellant:
Henry James Folsom, Scott Mertens, Ruth Montgomery and others
Johnson v. Doe et al
as 0:2022cv01309
Plaintiff:
Henry James Johnson, Jr.
Defendant:
John Doe and Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HOLMES v. WAGNER et al
as 2:2022cv00490
Plaintiff:
HENRY JAMES HOLMES
Defendant:
OCCUPANCY MANAGER LAVERNE WAGNER, OPPUPANCY SPECIALIST JONATHAN MURPHY, NINA BUSH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Fair Housing Act
James v. FPI Management Inc et al
as 2:2022cv00336
Defendant:
Mehrdad Rahimzadeh, FPI Management Inc, Cindy Hager and others
Plaintiff:
Henry James
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Holmes v. Keyes et al
as 0:2022cv00348
Plaintiff:
Henry James Holmes
Defendant:
City of Minneapolis, Ryan Keyes and Bach Dang
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Corbera v. Taylor
as 2:2021at01024
Plaintiff:
Wesley Corbera
Defendant:
Henry James Taylor
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Corbera v. Taylor
as 2:2021cv01998
Plaintiff:
Wesley Corbera
Defendant:
Henry James Taylor
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
