Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2026cv00944
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2026cv07719
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Dorletha Lambert v. Dexter Payne, et al
as 26-2834
Plaintiff:
Dorletha Lasha Lambert
Defendant:
Dexter Payne, Director, Arkansas Department of Corrections, Nurzuhal Faust, Warden, McPherson Women's Unit, Jamie Campbell, APN, McPherson Medical Unit and others
Edward Payne, Jr. v. Driver Number Two
as 26-3294
Plaintiff:
EDWARD HAYWOOD PAYNE, JR.
Defendant:
DRIVER NUMBER TWO, Name Unknown
conklin v. Payne et al
as 6:2026cv06931
Plaintiff:
chad robert conklin
Defendant:
Michael Payne, CRC Improvements Inc. and graham hershman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Payne v. Federal Express Corporation
as 2:2026cv01618
Plaintiff:
Adrian Payne
Defendant:
Federal Express Corporation
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv03063
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Jamiyah Robinson v. Joshua Payne, et al
as 26-13198
Plaintiff:
JAMIYAH ROBINSON, as Personal Representative of the Estate of James Lowery, Deceased
Defendant:
JOSHUA NATHAN PAYNE, individually and as an agent and employee of the Titusville Police Department and CITY OF TITUSVILLE, FLORIDA
Be Happy Pie Company Franchising LLC v. Judy Kay Enterprises LLC et al
as 5:2026cv00257
Plaintiff:
Be Happy Pie Company Franchising LLC
Defendant:
Judy Kay Enterprises LLC and Judy Payne
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1836 (a) Injunction against Misappropriation of Trade Secrets
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.
