Cases 1 - 10 of 293
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00586
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Wharton v. Otis Elevator Company
as 3:2024cv00214
Plaintiff:
Wendy Wharton
Defendant:
Otis Elevator Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Stepp v. Otis Elevator Company
as 2:2023cv01738
Plaintiff:
Denise Stepp
Defendant:
Otis Elevator Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Stepp v. Otis Elevator Company
as 2:2023cv01739
Plaintiff:
Denise Stepp
Defendant:
Otis Elevator Company, John Doe Corporations, John Doe Business Entities and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Stepp v. Otis Elevator Company
as 2:2023oe01738
Plaintiff:
Denise Stepp
Defendant:
Otis Elevator Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Watson v. Porter et al
as 3:2023cv00456
Plaintiff:
Deana Watson
Defendant:
Kenneth Porter, Otis Jenkins, Patrick Hunt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv10880
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Tankesly v. TN Department of Corrections et al (PSLC1)
as 1:2023cv00090
Plaintiff:
Calvin-Otis Tankesly, Jr.
Defendant:
TN Department of Corrections, Lisa Helton, Lee Dotson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kocsis v. Otis Elevator Company
as 2:2023cv10688
Plaintiff:
MARY KOCSIS
Defendant:
Otis Elevator Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Knight v. Detroit, City of et al
as 4:2023cv10295
Plaintiff:
Tyrese Davon Knight
Defendant:
City of Detroit, Detroit Police Department, Otis J. Funches and others
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.
