Cases 41 - 50 of 148
Ramos v. Metropolitan Transit Authority et al
as 1:2017cv06063
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Ramos
Defendant:
Metropolitan Transit Authority , Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority , Sgt. Damaris Crespo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2017cv01273
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2017cv00026
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv06972
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Purisima v. New York City Transit Authorit
as 16-4179
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Anton Purisima
Defendant - Appellee:
New York City Transit Authority, and/or MABSTOA, City of New York, Metropolitan Transit Authority New York City Transit and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv02401
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0794
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 16-20519
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Davis et al v. City of New York et al
as 1:2016cv04097
Defendant:
City of New York, P.O. Wanda Gowins, Jane Doe and John Doe and others
Plaintiff:
Rahiem Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv05023
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12132
Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1091 v. Capital Metropolitan Transit Authority et al
as 1:2016cv00735
Plaintiff:
Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1091
Defendant:
Capital Metropolitan Transit Authority, McDonald Transit, Inc. and Travis Transit Management, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
