Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Perez et al v. HITT Contracting, Inc. et al
as 1:2024mc00031
Plaintiff:
Jorge Perez, Alejandra Torres and Arys Solano
Defendant:
HITT Contracting, Inc., Brother's Mechanical, Inc., DAYCJ Plumbing & Mechanical Inc. and others
Garnishee:
Bank of America, N.A. and Wells Fargo N.A.
Palmer et al v. 3M Company et al
as 2:2023cv04823
Plaintiff:
Walter Palmer, Scott Moonen, James Mooney and others
Petitioner:
Guy Petersen
Defendant:
3M Company, AGC Chemicals Americas Inc, Amerex Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal-Product Liability
Hodge v. MGM National Harbor, LLC et al
as 8:2021cv03293
Plaintiff:
Harold H. Hodge, Jr.
Defendant:
MGM National Harbor, LLC, Jorge Perez, John Doe 1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 ra Race Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2020cv03936
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Perez-Robles v. Tripp et al
as 5:2017ct03274
Plaintiff:
Jorge Perez-Robles
Defendant:
Brick Tripp, Wallace Branch, Melissa West and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
SANCHEZ MENA et al v. SEASON TEPPANYAKI BUFFET LLC
as 8:2016cv02701
Plaintiff:
HIRAM SANCHEZ MENA , JORGE PEREZ ORDONEZ and SANTOS PEDRO OXLAJ GOMEZ
Defendant:
SEASON TEPPANYAKI BUFFET LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Jorge Perez Perez v. USA
as 3:2016cv00149
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Jorge Perez Perez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Perez-Robles v. United States of America
as 5:2016hc02024
Petitioner:
Jorge Perez-Robles
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Perez-Espinoza v. Cherry et al
as 1:2007cv01026
Petitioner:
Jorge Perez-Espinoza
Respondent:
Roy W. Cherry, Mary Loiselle, John P. Torres and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
