Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Hagos v. Jimenez et al
as 2:2022cv00932
Plaintiff:
Daniel Teklemariam Hagos
Defendant:
Seattle Police Department, Jose E Jimenez, Gerardo Moreno and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Hagos v. Seattle Police Department et al
as 2:2022cv00931
Plaintiff:
Daniel Teklemariam Hagos
Defendant:
Seattle Police Department, Jose E Jimenez, Gerardo Moreno and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Bowman v. Andrewjeski
as 2:2022cv00316
Petitioner:
Thomasdinh Newsome Bowman
Respondent:
Melissa Andrewjeski
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Newsome v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 3:2020cv05985
Plaintiff:
Willard Newsome
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Interested Party:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Rajagopalan et al v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland et al
as 3:2016cv05147
Plaintiff:
Amrish Rajagopalan , Marie Johnson-Peredo , Robert Hewson and others
Defendant:
Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland and Platte River Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Newsome v. Colvin
as 1:2014cv03095
Plaintiff:
Melody Newsome
Defendant:
Carolyn W Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Newsome-Manandic et al v. California Casualty General Insurance Company of Oregon
as 3:2013cv05534
Plaintiff:
Tammy Newsome-Manandic
Defendant:
California Casualty General Insurance Company of Oregon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2008cv05094
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2007cv05266
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.
