Cases 1 - 10 of 31,005
Patton v. Payne et al
as 4:2025cv00115
Plaintiff:
Joe Lee Patton
Defendant:
Dexter Payne, Gary Musselwhite, Lewis Young and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Zherka v. Davey et al
as 3:2025cv30024
Plaintiff:
Selim Zherka
Defendant:
Lisa Davey, Laura Bashaw, Mark Andrews and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
Young v. Pearle Vision, Inc. et al.
as 0:2025cv00496
Plaintiff:
Shaunta Young
Defendant:
Pearle Vision, Inc., Pearle Vision Franchise - Dr. Thomas Meyer Optometrist and Associates, Dr. Thomas Meyer and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Young v. Hoover
as 5:2025cv00026
Petitioner:
Tony E. Young
Respondent:
Hoover
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2025cv00044
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
BUSH v. VANSICKLE et al
as 2:2025cv00072
Plaintiff:
AERON CURTIS BUSH
Defendant:
M. VANSICKLE, MILLER, STARNES and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Oatis v. LaJoye-Young
as 1:2025cv00133
Petitioner:
Taj C. Oatis
Respondent:
Michelle LaJoye-Young
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ou-Young v. Busby, et al.
as 25-800
Plaintiff:
KUANG-BAO OU-YOUNG
Defendant:
MARK B. BUSBY, Clerk of U.S. District Court for Northern District of California, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL COUNCIL and others
Young v. U.S. Department of Justice
as 1:2025cv01316
Plaintiff:
Gwendolyn Young
Defendant:
U.S. Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
YOUNG v. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
as 1:2025cv00335
Plaintiff:
NICOLE M YOUNG
Defendant:
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Cause Of Action: 01DCC2439 WMATA (court jurisdiction)
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.