Cases 31 - 40 of 598
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00336
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
SANTIAGO v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2023cv03317
Plaintiff:
JUAN ROSARIO SANTIAGO
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, BLANCHE CARNEY, MICHELE FARRELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bey v. Poole et al
as 1:2023cv03704
Plaintiff:
Kingstate Bey
Defendant:
Officer Alex Poole, Norcross Police Department, Norcross Municipal Court and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 241 Conspiracy Against Citizen Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv00724
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00357
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 38 U.S.C. § 4301 Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2023cv06448
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
MALEK v. DUFFY et al
as 2:2023cv04344
Defendant:
SAFE HORIZON, CORPORATION COUNSEL, MATTHEW DUFFY and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT MALEK
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv06742
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 ad Job Discrimination (Disability Act)
Pool v. Woodland Park School District RE-2 et al
as 1:2023cv01947
Plaintiff:
Jessica Pool
Defendant:
Woodland Park School District RE-2, Ken Witt, Ken (I) Witt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Eun Lim v. City of Irvine, et al
as 23-55661
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EUN JUNG LIM
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF IRVINE, CITY OF IRVINE POLICE DEPARTMENT, RENE NUTTER, Police Officer, Badge No. 635, individual and official capacity and others
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.
