Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01078
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Hunter-Woodfork et al v. V J V Equipment Leasing Corp
as 2:2020cv00760
Defendant:
Pro Intermodal LLC, Osmany Paddron Castillo, V J V Equipment Leasing Corp and others
Plaintiff:
Sharon Hunter-Woodfork and Sheila Tate
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv00305
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv02015
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
HUNTER v. DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. et al
as 1:2015cv04986
Plaintiff:
SHARON HUNTER
Defendant:
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO U.S. HOLDINGS, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO CO., LTD. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hunter v. Coloplast Corp. et al
as 2:2014cv13764
Plaintiff:
Sharon Hunter
Defendant:
Coloplast Corp., Ethicon, Inc. , Ethicon, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hunter v. Bayer Corporation et al
as 3:2011cv13101
Plaintiff:
Sharon Hunter
Defendant:
Bayer Corporation, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc., Bayer Healthcare LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Lawrence Pittman, Sr. v. Lynette Conerly, et al
as 10-30133
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LAWRENCE R PITTMAN, SR.
Defendant - Appellee:
LYNETTE CONERLY, Court Reporter, JEROME WINSBERG, Honorable, Judge and SHARON HUNTER, Honorable, Judge
Pittman v. Conerly et al
as 2:2009cv07557
Plaintiff:
Lawrence Ray Pittman, Sr
Defendant:
Lynette Conerly, Jerome Winsberg and Sharon Hunter
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Henderson v. Astrue
as 4:2009cv00173
Plaintiff:
Sharon Hunter Henderson
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Type:
Other Statutes
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.
