Cases 1 - 10 of 25
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv00129
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Raines et al v. Subway Development of WV et al
as 2:2022cv00338
Plaintiff:
Lyndon A. Raines and Krista Farley Raines
Defendant:
Subway Development of WV, Subway Development of WV Pension Plan and Gregory T. Hammond
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Lomax v. Commonwealth of VA et al
as 1:2021cv00777
Defendant:
Commonwealth of VA, VA State Bar and Subway Franchise
Plaintiff:
Johnathan Ross Lomax
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2019cv01749
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2018cv00566
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2018cv00565
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Ramos v. Rals Subway Nova LLC et al
as 1:2018cv01223
Plaintiff:
Jose F. Ramos
Defendant:
Rals Subway Nova LLC, Rals Subway Partners LP and Pankaj J. Seth
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7434
Doctor's Associates Inc. et al v. Nijjar
as 1:2017cv00832
Plaintiff:
Doctor's Associates Inc. and Subway IP Inc.
Defendant:
Kamaljit Nijjar
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
United States of America v. J.A. Subway, Inc., et al.
as 1:2016cv00810
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
J.A. Subway, Inc. and Jamiu Lawal
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 6502
Mohammed Siwan v. US
as 14-1223
Petitioner:
MOHAMMED FATHI-ABDELLA SIWAN, President and Registered Agent, SIWAN & BROTHERS, INC., d/b/a Subway and SIWAN & SONS, INC., d/b/a Subway
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
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.
