Cases 71 - 80 of 192
DORSEY v. SHIRE REGENERATIVE MEDICINE, INC.
as 1:2013cv01583
Plaintiff:
JON DORSEY
Defendant:
SHIRE REGENERATIVE MEDICINE, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
GAMMON v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
as 3:2013cv00183
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Plaintiff:
GERALD L. GAMMON
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 206 Collect Unpaid Wages
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. COMMERCIAL AIR, INC.
as 1:2013cv01438
Defendant:
COMMERCIAL AIR, INC.
Plaintiff:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 160 (1) National Labor Relations Act
BOOHER v. TOWN OF WHITESTOWN, INDIANA
as 1:2013cv00696
Plaintiff:
JOHN MICHAEL BOOHER
Defendant:
TOWN OF WHITESTOWN, INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 626 Job Discrimination (Age)
HART v. FORGE INDUSTRIAL STAFFING INC.
as 1:2013cv00094
Defendant:
FORGE INDUSTRIAL STAFFING INC.
Plaintiff:
JUANITA HART
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
BOWEN v. SODEXO, INC. et al
as 1:2012cv01859
Plaintiff:
MARY BOWEN
Defendant:
DOES ONE THROUGH FIVE, RICHARD JACKSON and SODEXO, INC.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
PUTT v. MENARD, INC.
as 3:2012cv00187
Defendant:
MENARD, INC.
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM PUTT
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
AVILA et al v. MARTIN & MCDONALD CO., INC.
as 1:2012cv01289
Plaintiff:
MIKE AVILA, BRICKLAYERS OF INDIANA HEALTH AND WELFARE FUND, BRICKLAYERS OF INDIANA INTERNATIONAL FUND and others
Defendant:
MARTIN & MCDONALD CO., INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Johnson v. Gradle Partners, Inc.
as 1:2012cv00711
Defendant:
Gradle Partners, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Paul K. Johnson, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
JOHNSON v GRADLE PARTNERS, INC.
as 1:2012cv00710
Defendant:
GRADLE PARTNERS, INC.
Plaintiff:
PAUL K. JOHNSON, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
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.
