Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 42
Cenk Uygur v. South Carolina Democratic Party
as 24-1052
Plaintiff: CENK UYGUR and JOHN WARD
Defendant: SOUTH CAROLINA, HENRY MCMASTER, in his official capacity as Governor of South Carolina, ALAN WILSON, in his official capacity as Attorney General of South Carolina and others
Uygur et al v. South Carolina et al
as 3:2023cv06879
Plaintiff: Cenk Uygur and John Ward
Defendant: South Carolina, Henry McMaster, Alan Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Tennessee State Conference of the NAACP et al v. Lee et al
as 3:2023cv00832
Plaintiff: Tennessee State Conference of the NAACP, League of Women Voters of Tennessee, The Equity Alliance and others
Defendant: William B. Lee, Tre Hargett, Mark Goins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2022cv00911
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
TN St Conference of the NAACP, et al v. Tre Hargett, et al
as 21-6024
Plaintiff / Appellee: THE TENNESSEE STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP, DEMOCRACY NASHVILLE-DEMOCRATIC COMMUNITIES, THE EQUITY ALLIANCE and others
Defendant / Appellant: TRE HARGETT, in his official capacity as Secretary of State of Tennessee, MARK GOINS, in his official capacity as Coordinator of Elections for the State of Tennessee, TENNESSEE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION and others
Reardon v. City of Oxford, MS et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2021cv00118
Defendant: Deputy Courtney Dixon, Lynn Fitch, Lafayette Co Prosecutor Bela J Chain and others
Plaintiff: Matthew Oliver Reardon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
League of Women Voters of SC v. Marci Andino We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 20-2167
Plaintiff / Appellee: THE FAMILY UNIT, INC., LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, ALBERTUS CLEA and others
Defendant / Appellant: LINDA MCCALL, in her official capacity as member of the South Carolina State Election Commission, HOWARD M. KNAPP, in his official capacity as Director of Voter Services of the South Carolina State Election Commission, SCOTT MOSELEY, in his official capacity as member of the South Carolina State Election Commission and others
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant: REPRESENTATIVE JAMES H. LUCAS, in his capacity as Speaker of the South Carolina House of Representatives and SENATOR HARVEY PEELER, in his capacity as President of the South Carolina Senate
Kylon Middleton v. Marci Andino We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 20-2022
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant: JAMES H. LUCAS, Speaker of the South Carolina House of Representatives and HARVEY PEELER, in his capacity as President of the South Carolina Senate
Defendant / Appellant: SCOTT MOSELEY, in his official capacity as member of the South Carolina Election Commission, MARCI ANDINO, in her official capacity as Executive Director of the South Carolina State Election Commission, JOHN WELLS, in his official capacity as Chair of the South Carolina State Election Commission and others
Amicus Curiae: STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Plaintiff / Appellee: AMOS WELLS, ERNESTINE MOORE, TONYA WINBUSH and others
Intervenor: SOUTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN PARTY
Rigau et al v. Puerto Rico State Elections Commission et al
as 3:2020cv01385
Plaintiff: Yaramarys Torres, JIMMY ZORRILLA and Marco Antonio Rigau
Defendant: Juan E Davila Rivera and Puerto Rico State Elections Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
League of Women Voters of Tennessee et al v. Hargett et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2019cv00385
Defendant: Donna Barrett, State Election Commission, The, Mike McDonald and others
Plaintiff: League of Women Voters of Tennessee, Spread the Vote, American Muslim Advisory Council and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983

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.


Why Is My Information Online?