Cases 51 - 60 of 67
Carrillo et al v. Borges Construction, LLC
as 8:2013cv00641
Plaintiff:
Juan Pablo Carrillo , Julio Cesar Sanchez and Melvin Omar Lemus Cedillo
Defendant:
Borges Construction, LLC, Silvestre Borges, Maria Nicolalde and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Carrillo v. Boston Scientific Corporation
as 2:2012cv06886
Plaintiff:
Norma Carrillo
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Steshenko v. McKay et al
as 1:2012cv02161
Plaintiff:
Gregory Steshenko
Defendant:
Thomas McKay, Dorothy Nunn, Anne Lucero and others
Cause Of Action: Motion to Quash
Roth-Carrillo et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2012cv02420
Plaintiff:
Debra L. Roth-Carrillo and Joe W. Carrillo
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc. , Sofradim Production SAS and Tissue Science Laboratories Limited
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Carrillo v. South Carolina Department of Corrections
as 5:2012cv00788
Petitioner:
Carlos Carrillo
Respondent:
South Carolina Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 11-2310
Trustee - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Debtor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv00165
Debtor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
US v. Modesto Manrique
as 11-4050
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
MODESTO PRADO MANRIQUE, a/k/a Eduardo Carrillo, a/k/a Marco Govea Torres
US v. Eduardo Morales-Carrillo
as 10-5076
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
EDUARDO MORALES-CARRILLO
US v. Manuel Carrillo-Carvajal
as 10-4361
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
MANUEL CARRILLO-CARVAJAL, a/k/a Eleuterio Villa-Benitez
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.
