Cases 1 - 10 of 27
Shand v. Burgos et al
as 3:2024cv00570
Plaintiff:
Christopher Shand
Defendant:
Ruben Burgos, Mark Bounaventure, Jamal Linen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00274
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv01237
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Corwin et al v. Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al
as 3:2022cv01436
Plaintiff:
John Corwin, Robert Abrahams, Tonya Acosta and others
Defendant:
Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim USA Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Franklin v. Grey Hound
as 3:2022cv01157
Plaintiff:
Jamal M Franklin
Defendant:
Grey Hound
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Lane v. Warden
as 3:2022cv00093
Petitioner:
Ahmaad Jamal Lane
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv00085
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Luxottica Group SPA v. EZ Mart Foods of CT, Inc. et al
as 3:2020cv01821
Defendant:
EZ Mart Foods of CT, Inc., Hasan Jamal, Khalil Jamal and others
Plaintiff:
Luxottica Group SPA
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
Franklin v. Northern Dutchess Paramedics
as 3:2020cv00651
Plaintiff:
Jamal Franklin
Defendant:
Northern Dutchess Paramedics
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Luxottica Group SPA v. Jamal et al
as 3:2020cv00583
Defendant:
EZ Mart Foods of CT, Inc., Hasan Jamal, Khalil Jamal and others
Plaintiff:
Luxottica Group SPA
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
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.
