Cases 31 - 40 of 1,335
Montrond v. Divris
as 4:2024cv40032
Petitioner:
Pedro Montrond
Respondent:
Superintendent Matthew J. Divris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
NEWREZ LLC v. VANROSENDAEL et al
as 2:2024cv00051
Plaintiff:
NEWREZ LLC doing business as SHELLPOINT MORTGAGE SERVICING
Defendant:
NICOLE M VANROSENDAEL and MATTHEW J BENSON
Interested Party:
SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Lorig v. Covidien LP et al
as 1:2024cv10368
Plaintiff:
Matthew J Lorig
Defendant:
Covidien LP and Sofradim Production SAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00051
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Leo v. Divris
as 4:2024cv40021
Petitioner:
Anthony M Leo
Respondent:
Matthew Divris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1098
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
DIAB v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY et al
as 1:2024cv10191
Plaintiff:
MAHMOUD DIAB
Defendant:
United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Acting Secretary of Alejandro Mayorkas and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1044
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Barker v. Divris et al
as 1:2024cv10089
Plaintiff:
Timothy Barker
Defendant:
Matthew Divris, Anthony Findley and Joe Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Levy et al v. Westfield Bank
as 3:2024cv30004
Plaintiff:
Matthew Levy and Anthony Rondoletto
Defendant:
Westfield Bank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
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.
