Guam Civil Rights Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 202
Doe v. Guam Visitors Bureau et al
as 1:2026cv00017
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
Guam Visitors Bureau and George Chiu
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Aldan v. Guam Department of Corrections Et. Al. et al
as 1:2026cv00005
Plaintiff:
Clarence G. Aldan
Defendant:
Guam Department of Corrections Et. Al., Alan P. Borja and Fred Bordallo
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rai, M.S.M.A., Sui Iuris v. Bisignano
as 1:2026cv00003
Defendant:
Mr. Frank J. Bisignano
Plaintiff:
Mr. Alexander K. Rai, M.S.M.A., Sui Iuris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgement
Adams v. Jimenez
as 1:2026cv00002
Plaintiff:
Jessie Adams
Defendant:
Sergio Jimenez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Williams v. Jimenez et al
as 1:2026cv00001
Plaintiff:
Lucas Williams
Defendant:
Sergio Jimenez, Kevin C. McClanahan, Carmen Pacheco and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Miller v. Department of Veterans Affairs, et al.
as 1:2025cv00049
Defendant:
Veterans Administration Clinic Manila (VACM)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2025cv00047
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Shapiro v. Campanelli
as 1:2025cv00045
Plaintiff:
John Shapiro
Defendant:
Joy Campanelli
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Choi v. Guam Healthcare Development, Inc.
as 1:2025cv00038
Plaintiff:
Sun Lee Choi
Defendant:
Guam Healthcare Development, Inc. and Does 1-20
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Quitugua v. Quitugua et al
as 1:2025cv00036
Plaintiff:
Eddie Lawrence Quitugua
Defendant:
Donna P. Quitugua, Ryan C.P. Quitugua, Nacrina F. Mendiola and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
