Cases 21 - 30 of 159
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv01277
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Lau v. Farmer et al
as 6:2022cv01952
Plaintiff:
Tera B. Lau
Defendant:
Linda Farmer and Volusia County Sheriff's Office
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lau v. Preston et al
as 6:2022cv02027
Plaintiff:
Tera B. Lau
Defendant:
Rachel Preston and Harmony Clinic Medical and Chiropractic
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lau v. Kelly
as 6:2022cv02000
Plaintiff:
Tera Brooke Lau
Defendant:
Christopher Kelly
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv09209
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12131 Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
John Doe v. Schick et al
as 1:2022cv06015
Plaintiff:
John Doe and Gilbert Lau
Defendant:
Hon. Stephen G. Schick, JSC, Bryan R. Kaplan, Esq., Priscilla Andrewski and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv06971
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Jackson v. City Of Chicago et al
as 1:2022cv04337
Plaintiff:
Dennis Jackson
Defendant:
City Of Chicago, Patrick Boyle, Jennifer Burmistrz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Randolph v. City of Harrisburg et al
as 1:2022cv01239
Plaintiff:
Samuel Randolph
Defendant:
City of Harrisburg, Robert Fegan, Donald Heffner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Larry Roberts v. David Lau, et al
as 22-2340
Plaintiff / Appellee:
LARRY TRENT ROBERTS
Defendant / Appellee:
DAVID LAU, Detective and CITY OF HARRISBURG
Defendant / Appellant:
JOHN C. BAER, Assistant District Attorney
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.
