Cases 11 - 20 of 556
Ortega v. Priority Contracting and Roofing LLC
as 5:2024cv00351
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
Priority Contracting and Roofing LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
FILING ERROR
as 5:2024cv00331
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
Keller Williams Realty Inc
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Ortega v. KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY, INC
as 5:2024cv00332
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY, INC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Jessie v. Ortega et al
as 3:2024cv00070
Plaintiff:
Karen Jessie
Defendant:
Jesus Ortega and Tum Logistics Carrier Division, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Tort/Motor Vehicle (P.I.)
USA v. Ortega
as 24-50215
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Lisa Marie Ortega, also known as Lisa Ortega
Ortega v. Ed Gonzalez et al
as 4:2024cv01077
Plaintiff:
Raphael Ortega
Defendant:
Ed Gonzalez and Harris County Sherrif's Office
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Caceres et al v. Rodriguez et al
as 3:2024cv00218
Plaintiff:
Jeydi Ramos Caceres and Karol Ortega Munguia
Defendant:
Rogelio Eduardo Rodriguez, Ramtex Recycling, Inc. and Berkley National Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
USA v. Gandara-Ortega
as 24-50172
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Victor Manuel Gandara-Ortega
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00453
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Ortega v. O'Malley
as 3:2024cv00024
Plaintiff:
Nadia Ortega
Defendant:
Commissioner, Social Security Administration
Interested Party:
Social Security Administration - Interested Party
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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.
