Cases 81 - 90 of 57,347
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01290
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01284
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
APPLICATION OF USA PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 3512 FOR ORDER FOR COMMISSIONER'S APPOINTMENT FOR A FRAUD INVESTIGATION
as 1:2024ml00964
Not Yet Classified:
APPLICATION OF USA PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 3512 FOR ORDER FOR COMMISSIONER'S APPOINTMENT FOR A FRAUD INVESTIGATION
Interested Party:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STURM v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
as 1:2024cv01298
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW W. STURM
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01287
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Not Yet Classified:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01288
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
TERNES et al v. C.R. HOME IMPROVEMENT, INC.
as 1:2024cv01277
Plaintiff:
LISA TERNES and JAY JEMAIL
Defendant:
C.R. HOME IMPROVEMENT, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
HERZFELD v. BARMADA et al.
as 1:2024cv01272
Plaintiff:
SHMUEL HERZFELD
Defendant:
HAZAMI BARMADA and ATAFEH ROKHVAND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01275
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al v. UDR, INC.
as 1:2024cv01278
Plaintiff:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Intervenor:
Ms. G. and Ms. M.
Defendant:
UDR, INC.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Fair Housing 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.
