Cases 1 - 10 of 586
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv01106
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Brown v. FFIC Goodwill et al
as 2:2024cv00469
Plaintiff:
Jessica M. Brown
Defendant:
FFIC Goodwill and Adrian Woods
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00237
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Woods v. Investment Realty Advisons
as 2:2024cv00477
Plaintiff:
Terryett O. Woods
Defendant:
Investment Realty Advisons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Woods v. Store Front/ Valley Behavioral Health
as 2:2024cv00476
Plaintiff:
Terryett O. Woods
Defendant:
Store Front/ Valley Behavioral Health
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00419
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Alyssa A. Williams et al v. City of Santa Ana et al
as 8:2024cv00881
Plaintiff:
Alyssa A. Williams, Jacob Williams and LeRoy M. Woods
Petitioner:
Patricia Borello and DOES 1 through 10 inclusive
Defendant:
City of Santa Ana and Police Chief Robert Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Harel Talasazan v. Robert M. Farrell et al
as 2:2024cv01356
Defendant:
Attorney Poonam Patidar, Robert M. Farrell, Maria R. Hamilton and others
Plaintiff:
Harel Talasazan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Wood v. Eikenberry
as 3:2024cv00170
Plaintiff:
Andrea Wood
Defendant:
Kevin Eikenberry
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02829
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities 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.
