Cases 41 - 50 of 60
MARTIN v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv58803
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL MARTIN
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MARTIN v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv55751
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL MARTIN
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
REVELS v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv13278
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL MARTIN REVELS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Martin et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.,
as 7:2017cv01605
Plaintiff:
Michael Martin and Mary Ann Martin
Defendant:
JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.,
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 2601
Banchero v. MMPB Group, LLC. et al
as 1:2017cv22150
Plaintiff:
Dziyana Banchero
Defendant:
MMPB Group, LLC., JPM Management Group, LLC., Michael Martin Group, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
Michael Martin v. Secretary, Department of Corre, et al
as 17-10349
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL MARTIN
Respondent - Appellee:
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
In re: Michael Hudson
as 16-16675
Petitioner:
In re: MICHAEL MARTIN HUDSON
Successive Habeas Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Banegas et al v. MMPB Group, LLC. et al
as 1:2016cv24134
Plaintiff:
Dani Banegas and Jorge Hernandez
Defendant:
MMPB GROUP, LLC., Michael Martin, Antoine Delgado and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0002 Fair Labor Standards Act
Michael Hudson v. Warden
as 16-14912
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL MARTIN HUDSON
Respondent - Appellee:
FCC COLEMAN - LOW WARDEN
Martin v. Secretary, Department of Corrections
as 6:2016cv00881
Petitioner:
Michael Martin
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General, State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
