Cases 1 - 10 of 146
Marin v. Educational Testing Service
as 24-817
Plaintiff:
MEL M. MARIN
Defendant:
EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00201
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00110
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12132 Americans with Disabilities Act - Discrimination
ELLIOTT v. AMAZON.COM, INC. et al
as 2:2023cv03792
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ELLIOTT
Defendant:
AMAZON.COM, INC., INTERTEK USA, INC., INTERTEK CALEB BRETT and others
Cross Defendant:
ABC MAINTENANCE COMPANY (IES) 1-5 and HANGZHOU OU YUE E-COMMERCE CO.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Property Damage
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv20326
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
INTERTEK TESTING SERVICES NA, INC. v. EUROFINS NSC US, INC.
as 5:2023mc00126
Plaintiff:
INTERTEK TESTING SERVICES NA, INC.
Defendant:
EUROFINS NSC US, INC.
Ivy Testing Service, Inc. v. S & S Commercial, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv00168
Plaintiff:
Ivy Testing Service, Inc.
Defendant:
S & S Commercial, Inc. and Debra J. Silliman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv03653
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv02101
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Sowell v. Southwest Airlines Co. et al
as 1:2023cv00634
Plaintiff:
Kammy Sowell
Defendant:
Southwest Airlines Co. and Midland Testing Services Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
