Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Brian Carter v. Foundation of Appalachian Kentucky, et al
as 26-5334
Plaintiff:
BRIAN A. CARTER
Defendant:
FOUNDATION OF APPALACHIAN KENTUCKY, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE, KENTUCKY PUBLIC PROTECTION CABINET and others
Carter v. Foundation of Appalachian Kentucky et al
as 6:2026cv00112
Plaintiff:
Brian A. Carter
Defendant:
Foundation of Appalachian Kentucky, Gerry F. Roll, Housing Development Alliance and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2025cv04635
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hacker et al. v. ArcelorMittal Tubular Products USA LLC et al.
as 1:2024cv00341
Plaintiff:
Ronald Hacker and Jinny Hacker
Defendant:
ArcelorMittal Tubular Products USA LLC, Benefits Administration Committee of ArcelorMittal Tubular Products Plan No. 508 and Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Lim, Khor v. Walker, Scott et al
as 3:2012cv00625
Plaintiff:
Khor Chin Lim
Defendant:
Scott Walker, John J. McAlary, Diane F. Bosse and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Lim, Khor v. Walker, Scott et al
as 3:2012cv00552
Plaintiff:
Khor Chin Lim
Defendant:
Scott Walker, John J. McAlary, Diane F. Bosse and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Lim, Khor v. Walker, Scott et al
as 3:2012cv00492
Plaintiff:
Khor Chin Lim
Defendant:
Scott Walker, Staples, Inc., Ron Sargant and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Khor Lim v. Rong Sheng, Inc., et al
as 12-55488
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KHOR CHIN LIM
Defendant - Appellee:
RONG SHENG, INC., a corporation, KITTY C. CHIANG, RONALD HACKER, an individual and others
Khor Chin Lim v. Rong Sheng Inc et al
as 2:2012cv01482
Defendant:
Kitty C Chiang, Does, Ronald Hacker and others
Plaintiff:
Khor Chin Lim
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.
