Cases 11 - 20 of 2,270
Flores v. United Parcel Service, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv00176
Plaintiff:
Ronnys Batista Flores
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc. and Malcolm Dillon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2024cv00306
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00436
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv01059
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00063
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01512
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00114
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Bitsoli v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
as 1:2024cv10924
Plaintiff:
James Bitsoli
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
ENDRES v. AIR CANADA, INC. et al
as 1:2024cv00883
Plaintiff:
STEVEN ENDRES
Defendant:
AIR CANADA, INC., AIR FRANCE-KLM S.A., ALASKA AIR GROUP, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Raudez Mejia v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
as 2:2024cv00246
Plaintiff:
Vilce Jose Raudez Mejia
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
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.
