Cases 41 - 50 of 323
Adames Duran v. Melo Vargas et al
as 1:2022cv04761
Defendant:
Fernando R. Melo Vargas, Denisse Altagracia Castillo, Fernando Mello and others
Plaintiff:
Jose Adames Duran
Acevedo v. St. Andrews Estates 26 LLC
as 1:2022cv04682
Plaintiff:
Juan Acevedo
Defendant:
St. Andrews Estates 26 LLC
Cause Of Action: 11 U.S.C. § 101 Bankruptcy
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv07016
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
United States of America v. Jordan (Santos)
as 22-1714
Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant:
Keith Jordan, AKA Knowledge, Brian Hanna, AKA Zo, Katina Reed, AKA Tina and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Pedro Santos, AKA Primo
Emrith et. al v. iMobile, LLC et al
as 2:2022cv03704
Plaintiff:
Sherry Emrith, Rood Lebrun, Samantha Sutton and others
Defendant:
iMobile, LLC and iMobile USA, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Acevedo v. Garland
as 22-6170
Petitioner:
REINA ISABEL ACEVEDO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Emrith et. al v. iMobile, LLC et al
as 1:2022cv03704
Plaintiff:
Sherry Emrith, Rood Lebrun, Samantha Sutton and others
Defendant:
iMobile, LLC and iMobile USA, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Acevedo v. Keurig Dr Pepper, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv02157
Plaintiff:
Edwin Derick Morales Acevedo
Defendant:
Keurig Dr Pepper, Inc. and Dr Pepper/Seven Up, Inc.
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02041
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Acevedo-Gomez v. J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv01313
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Acevedo-Gomez
Defendant:
J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. and Kofi Adusei
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 au Petition for Removal- Auto Negligence
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.
