Cases 41 - 50 of 54
Tamayo v. Spice Resto-Lounge, Inc. et al
as 0:2014cv62189
Plaintiff:
Gloria Tamayo
Defendant:
Spice Resto-Lounge, Inc. , Frank C. Hernandez and Arnaldo Batista
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
In re: Henry Resto
as 14-14232
Petitioner:
In re: HENRY RESTO
Successive Habeas Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
In re: Henry Resto
as 14-13376
Petitioner:
In re: HENRY RESTO
Successive Habeas Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Henry Resto v. Secretary, FL DOC, et al
as 14-12862
Petitioner - Appellant:
HENRY RESTO
Respondent - Appellee:
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Resto v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 6:2014cv00973
Petitioner:
Henry Resto
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General, State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Resto v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 6:2013cv00458
Petitioner:
Henry Resto
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General, State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Caminos v. Spice Resto-Lounge, Inc. et al
as 1:2012cv23973
Plaintiff:
Carlos Sergio Caminos
Defendant:
Spice Resto-Lounge, Inc. , Frank C. Hernandez and Arnaldo Batista
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2012cv61632
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Resto-Hernandez v. Terex Utilities, Inc. et al
as 6:2012cv00377
Plaintiff:
Alexander Resto-Hernandez
Defendant:
Terex Utilities, Inc. , Terex-Telelect, Inc. , Utility Equipment Leasing Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Lasprilla v. Bastista et al
as 0:2010cv60149
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Lasprilla
Defendant:
Arnaldo Batista and Spice Resto-Lounge, Inc.
Mediator:
Neil Flaxman
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
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.
