Cases 1 - 10 of 100
NICHOLAS et al v. CITY OF CHICAGO et al
as 1:2026cv07795
Plaintiff:
JERRY NICHOLAS, SR, CHRISTOPHER NICHOLAS, PRINCESS NICHOLAS and others
Defendant:
CITY OF CHICAGO, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES (DCFS) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv01216
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv03037
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Prentice, et al. v. LeafFilter International, Inc., et al.
as 26-2604
Plaintiff:
JEAN-PAUL PRENTICE and VIRGINIA G. PRENTICE
Defendant:
LEAFFILTER INTERNATIONAL, INC., WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. and LEAFFILTER NORTH, LLC
McDuffie v. USA
as 8:2026cv01787
Petitioner:
Lance Prentice McDuffie
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Caples v. Evans
as 4:2026cv00048
Petitioner:
Prentice D. Caples
Respondent:
Edward Evans
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv01543
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
50th District Court et al v. Prentice
as 2:2026cv10758
Plaintiff:
50th District Court and Michael McLoyd
Defendant:
Glenn Michael Prentice
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
PRENTICE v. PFIZER INC et al
as 3:2026cv00978
Plaintiff:
CORTNEY PRENTICE
Defendant:
PFIZER INC, PHARMACIA & UPJOHN COMPANY LLC and PHARMACIA LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Silva-Prentice v. Kennedy
as 25-2227
Petitioner:
ROBERT SILVA-PRENTICE
Respondent:
STEPHEN KENNEDY, Superintendent, Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center
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.
