Cases 31 - 40 of 52
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv04799
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Perez v. City of New York et al
as 1:2014cv02571
Plaintiff:
Jose Perez
Defendant:
City of New York , Brendan Reilly, William Dooley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Flores v. Holder
as 14-53
Petitioner:
Miguel Antonio Flores, AKA Miguel Angel Flores, AKA Jose Perez, AKA Jose Daniel Perez, AKA Daniel Perez
Respondent:
Eric H. Holder, Jr., United States Attorney General
United States of America v. Thompson
as 13-3729
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant:
Jose Perez
Defendant - Appellant:
Roberto Thompson
United States of America v. Thompson
as 13-3316
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant:
Jose Perez
Defendant - Appellant:
Roberto Thompson
Sanchez v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2013cv05752
Plaintiff:
Jose Perez Sanchez
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Rev. of Final Dec. of Sec. of HEW re: S.S. Benefits
Thompson v. United States of America
as 13-3024
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant:
Jose Perez
Defendant - Appellant:
Roberto Thompson, AKA Robert Thompson, AKA Nigel Joseph
Brown et al v. The City of New York et al
as 1:2013cv04889
Plaintiff:
Remy Brown , Andrew Hudson and Jose Perez
Defendant:
The City of New York, Aaron Johnson and John Does
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Perez et al v. Matrat LLC et al
as 1:2012cv09262
Plaintiff:
Jose Perez and Jorge Perez
Defendant:
Matrat LLC and Tareq Ahmed
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
as 1:2012cv08333
Plaintiff:
John Joyce-Summerfeld, Parithan Kungsuvvan, Luz Martinez Acosta and others
Defendant:
Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
