Cases 1 - 10 of 3,186
Holliday v. Monroe County, Mississippi et al
as 1:2024cv00082
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Stephen Holliday
Defendant:
Monroe County, Mississippi and Monroe County Sheriff's Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00124
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00079
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00057
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00043
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Moslow et al v. City Of Southaven, Mississippi et al
as 3:2024cv00055
Plaintiff:
David Warran Moslow, Jr. and Suzanne Moslow
Defendant:
City Of Southaven, Mississippi, Southaven Police Department, Former Police Chief Macon Moore and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury Venue
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00044
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00074
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Wade et al v. Greenville Police Department
as 4:2024cv00022
Plaintiff:
Eric Wade and Yvette Toy
Defendant:
Greenville Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00103
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
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.
