Cases 31 - 40 of 489
Etienne v. Sanders et al
as 5:2023cv00214
Respondent:
KAREN REA PERKINS, MACHELLE SANDERS, TAMMIE ELAINE HALL and others
Petitioner:
DINEEN CHERYLANN ETIENNE
Defendant:
Reserve at Carrington Place
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03270
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
VANDERPOOL MANAGEMENT, LP v. SLOAN et al
as 5:2023cv00461
Plaintiff:
VANDERPOOL MANAGEMENT, LP
Defendant:
DON SLOAN, BOB WILLIAMS, NEIL BOULTINGHOUSE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Marta Jo Stampone, et al v. Brittian Amann, et al
as 23-1617
Plaintiff:
MARTA JO STAMPONE, Formerly known as Hieshetter
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FREDERICK STAMPONE
Defendant / Appellee:
BRITTIAN AMANN, BENJAMIN AMANN, GRAND RAPIDS FOAM TECHNOLOGIES and others
Defendant:
DONALD J. TRUMP, PAUL L. MALONEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR and others
Sloan v. Harvey et al
as 2:2023cv00059
Plaintiff:
Christopher M. Sloan
Defendant:
Gary Harvey and David Piper
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-63
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cairns v. Quinn et al
as 3:2022cv01979
Plaintiff:
Nigel Cairns
Defendant:
Tommy Quinn, Tamatha Thomas, Dewayne Frost and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 vp Violation of Due Process and Equal Protection
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00656
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv04703
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
SLOANE v. BLACK
as 2:2022cv04657
Plaintiff:
Novice Sloane
Defendant:
RACHEL BLACK
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.
