Cases 1 - 10 of 48
Shaw v. Dermatology Realm et al
as 2:2024cv02271
Plaintiff:
Tekeva Shaw
Defendant:
Dermatology Realm, Clarx Big Country Dermatology, Memphis Dermatology and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01761
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv04487
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (religion)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv01727
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02334
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Costamagna v. McKesson Corp., et al
as 2:2023at00501
Plaintiff:
Heidi Costamagna
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation and McKesson Medical Surgical Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Costamagna v. McKesson Corp., et al
as 2:2023cv01008
Plaintiff:
Heidi Costamagna
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation and McKesson Medical Surgical Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv02065
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00556
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
v. McKesson Corporation et al
as 5:2022cv00410
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation and McKesson Medical-Surgical, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
