Cases 51 - 60 of 443,705
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv02277
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Ewing v. Back et al
as 3:2024cv00175
Plaintiff:
Steven Guy Ewing
Defendant:
J. Back and Tammy W. Jefferson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
v. McCullough et al
as 4:2024cv02284
Defendant:
Mr. Patrick McCullough, Mr. Donald Marcus, Masters Mates & Pilots Pension Plan and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Perez v. Koch Industries Employees' Pension Plan
as 6:2024cv00020
Plaintiff:
Reymundo Perez
Defendant:
Koch Industries Employees' Pension Plan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Del Oro Communities, LLC v. RGN Services, Inc.
as 4:2024cv02282
Plaintiff:
Del Oro Communities, LLC
Defendant:
RGN Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 9 U.S.C. § 9 Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award
Muto v. Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
as 3:2024cv01507
Plaintiff:
Marcelo Muto
Defendant:
Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Robin v. Olson et al
as 3:2024cv01508
Plaintiff:
Jincy Robin
Defendant:
Harvey Olson and S & J Potashnick Transportation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv01504
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Damm v. The State of Texas
as 4:2024cv00560
Petitioner:
Gregory Paul Damm
Respondent:
The State of Texas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Daniels v. Texas Workforce Commission et al
as 4:2024cv00559
Plaintiff:
Briaunna Daniels
Defendant:
Texas Workforce Commission and Americredit Financial Services Inc.
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.
