Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Roberts v. County of Cook through Cermak Health Services of Cook County et al
as 1:2021cv04436
Plaintiff:
Randy Roberts
Defendant:
County of Cook through Cermak Health Services of Cook County, Cook County Sheriff Dart J Thomas, Officer K. Gamble and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gamble v. Roses & More Inc
as 2:2013cv00363
Plaintiff:
Cleveland K Gamble
Defendant:
Roses & More Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 13-13587
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2013cv00697
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
United States of America v. Gamble et al
as 5:2013cv00014
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Jacqueline K. Gamble and Any Tenants or Occupants Residing 1690 West Hill Road, Hardwick, VT 05843
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Foreclosure
GEORGE K GAMBLE v. H.K. PORTER CO., INC. et al
as 2:2009cv73943
Plaintiff:
GEORGE K GAMBLE
Defendant:
H.K. PORTER CO., INC., ROCK WOOL MANUFACTURING CO., INC., PITTSBURGH CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
GAMBLE et al v. AQUA-CHEM, INC. et al
as 2:2008cv79832
Plaintiff:
TOMMY D. GAMBLE and JACQUELINE K. GAMBLE
Defendant:
AQUA-CHEM, INC., BORG-WARNER MORSE TEC, INC., CERTAINTEED CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Gamble et al v. Aqua-Chem, Inc. et al
as 1:2008cv00149
Plaintiff:
Tommy D. Gamble and Jacqueline K. Gamble
Defendant:
Aqua-Chem, Inc., Borg-Warner Morse TEC, Inc., CertainTeed Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2008cv00283
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
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.
