Cases 41 - 50 of 5,193
US v. Yu
as 24-1325
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant:
HAOYANG YU, a/k/a Jack Yu, a/k/a Harry Yu, a/k/a Jack Tricon
Interested Party:
ANALOG DEVICES, INC.
T v. O'Malley, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
as 1:2024cv10875
Plaintiff:
K T
Defendant:
Martin J. O'Malley, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
Groden v. NASDI, LLC
as 24-1107
Plaintiff:
EDWARD F. GRODEN, Executive Director of the New England Teamsters and Trucking Industry Pension Fund
Defendant:
NASDI, LLC, f/k/a North American Site Developers, Inc.
Barth v. Town of Waterboro, et al
as 24-1170
Plaintiff:
JOHN S. BARTH
Defendant:
TOWN OF WATERBORO, GARY LAMB, SAMUEL G. JOHNSON and others
Landry v. Rhode Island State Police et al
as 1:2024cv00099
Defendant:
Ana Cristina Cola, Rhode Island State Police, Lt. R. Richardson and others
Plaintiff:
Norman J. Landry, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 241 Conspiracy Against Citizen Rights
Daley v. The Schepens Eye Research Institute
as 24-1130
Plaintiff:
NANCY DALEY
Defendant:
MIRA, INC., SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE, f/k/a Eye Research Institute of Retina Foundation and THE SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE, f/k/a Eye Research Institute of Retina Foundation
BioFort Corp et al v. Savir-Baruch
as 3:2024cv01137
Plaintiff:
BioFort Corp, BIOFORT and Marigdalia K. Ramirez-Fort
Defendant:
Bital Savir-Baruch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander
Kifor v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, et al
as 24-1075
Plaintiff:
IMRE KIFOR
Defendant:
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, MA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, MIDDLESEX PROBATE AND FAMILY COURT and others
Vose v. Kilmartin, et al
as 24-1066
Plaintiff:
CARLTON VOSE
Defendant:
PETER F. KILMARTIN, GERALD J. COYNE, PATRICIA K. ROCHA and others
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.
