Cases 21 - 30 of 17,599
Ross v. Tipton County
as 2:2024cv02313
Plaintiff:
Shelby Ross
Defendant:
Tipton County
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Doe #1 MLC et al v. Lee et al
as 3:2024cv00585
Plaintiff:
John Doe #1 (MKC) and John Doe #2 (JAS)
Defendant:
William B. Lee and David B. Rausch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00596
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00313
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Winningham v. Fentress County et al
as 2:2024cv00017
Plaintiff:
Trisha Winningham
Defendant:
Fentress County, Michael Reagon, Fast Access Healthcare, PLLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00590
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
Doe #066 v. Lee et al
as 3:2024cv00586
Plaintiff:
John Doe #066
Defendant:
William Lee and David Rausch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00594
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Shelby County Board of Education
as 2:2024cv02178
Plaintiff:
The Satanic Temple, Inc.
Defendant:
Shelby County Board of Education
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Krasner Loan Co., Inc d/b/a American Loan Company v. Ferraris et al
as 2:2024cv02177
Plaintiff:
Krasner Loan Co., Inc. doing business as American Loan Company
Defendant:
Emil S Ferraris, Brent E Weirich, City of Bartlett, Tennessee Government and others
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.
