Cases 1 - 10 of 38
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2024cv01051
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Griffin v. T-Mobile
as 6:2023cv05639
Plaintiff:
James A. Griffin
Defendant:
T-Mobile
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv05124
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv05105
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Bey v. AT & T Mobility
as 8:2023cv05076
Plaintiff:
Yahkema Bey
Defendant:
AT & T Mobility
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
Bey v. Mobility
as 8:2023cv05016
Plaintiff:
Brittany Bey, Brittany Thomas, Brittany Nechelle Thomas and others
Defendant:
AT&T Mobility and AT & T Mobility
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
Morton v. Duke Energy et al
as 6:2023cv04571
Plaintiff:
Carlo L Morton
Defendant:
Duke Energy, C.P.M. Federal Credit Union, T-Mobile and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Griffin v. T-Mobile
as 6:2023cv04453
Plaintiff:
James A. Griffin
Defendant:
T-Mobile
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed Question: Fed Communications Act of 1
Keene v. The Short-Term Disability and Maternity Leave Program provided under the T-Mobile USA, Inc. Employee Benefit Plan
as 2:2023cv03227
Plaintiff:
Mark Keene
Defendant:
The Short-Term Disability and Maternity Leave Program provided under the T-Mobile USA, Inc. Employee Benefit Plan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Whatley, II v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.
as 2:2023cv01339
Plaintiff:
Samuel T. Whatley, II
Defendant:
T-Mobile USA, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1693 Electronic Fund Transfer 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.
