Cases 11 - 20 of 103
PIMENTEL v. PORT AUTHORITY OF NY & NJ et al
as 2:2023cv10749
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS PIMENTEL
Defendant:
PORT AUTHORITY OF NY & NJ, SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES and DOES 1-20
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv01666
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv00515
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02539
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv02114
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1201 Civil Rights (Disability)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 22-4062
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv02072
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
David Webb v. James Hall, et al
as 22-3267
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID Q. WEBB
Defendant / Appellee:
ATTORNEY JAMES P. HALL, Co-owner, KIMBERLY A. PARKS, Legal Assistant, MARY F. FITZPATRICK, Legal Assistant and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2022cv01932
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrimination
Bell Corbett v. Noosa Pest Management LLC et al
as 3:2022cv00460
Plaintiff:
Mary I. Bell Corbett
Defendant:
Noosa Pest Management LLC and Sedgwick Claims Management Services Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
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.
