Cases 11 - 20 of 69
Mawule Tepe v. USA, et al
as 23-5188
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MAWULE TEPE
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CURTIS L. COLLIER, United States District Court Judge, KATHERINE A. CRYTZER, United States Magistrate Judge and others
Tepe v. United States
as 1:2022cv00275
Plaintiff:
Mawule Tepe
Defendant:
United States, Curtis L Collier, Katherine A. Crytzer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Lattimore v. Kosciusko County Sheriff
as 3:2022cv00900
Plaintiff:
Alex Lattimore
Defendant:
Kosciusko County Sheriff, John Does and Jane Does
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Tepe v. Nelson et al
as 1:2022cv00252
Plaintiff:
Mawule Tepe
Defendant:
Lucille Lattimore Nelson and Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.
Petitioner:
Whirlpool Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
El v. Horowitz et al
as 3:2022cv00001
Plaintiff:
My'Ka El
Defendant:
Michael E Horowitz, US Department of Justice, Gretchen C.F. Shappert and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lattimore v. Deavies
as 1:2021cv01165
Plaintiff:
Dedric Lattimore
Defendant:
M. Deavies
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2021cv00038
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01032
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2020cv02175
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Lattimore, Guardian et al v. City of Southfield et al
as 2:2020cv12738
Defendant:
Phillip Mulligan, Jake Kroll, Scott Rickard and others
Plaintiff:
Timesha Beauchamp, incapacitated person and Erika Lattimore, Guardian
Cause Of Action: 42 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.
