Cases 21 - 30 of 270
USA v. Beltran
as 22-50939
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Hernaldo Perea Beltran, also known as Nalo, also known as Naldo
Washington v. McLane
as 22-50815
Plaintiff / Appellant:
William Washington
Defendant / Appellee:
Marsha McLane, Executive Director, Texas Civil Commitment Office, Jessica Marsh, Deputy Director, Texas Civil Commitment Office, Amanda Beltran, Case Manager, Texas Civil Commitment Office and others
Le et al v. United Property and Casualty Insurance Company
as 2:2022cv02023
Plaintiff:
Khoa Le and Myla Beltran
Defendant:
United Property and Casualty Insurance Company and United Property and Casualty Insurance Co.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
USA v. Beltran-Castillo
as 22-50394
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Samuel Beltran-Castillo
Contreras-Beltran v. USA
as 3:2022cv01019
Petitioner:
Catherine Contreras-Beltran
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Contreras-Beltran v. USA
as 3:2022cv00976
Petitioner:
Catherine Contreras-Beltran
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Ayala-Beltran v. USA
as 2:2022cv00080
Plaintiff:
Jose Guadalupe Ayala-Beltran
Defendant:
USA
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Beltran v. Espinoza
as 2:2022cv00043
Plaintiff:
Erika del Rosario Beltran
Defendant:
Felicia Espinoza
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
USA v. Beltran
as 22-50046
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Jonathon A. Beltran
Beltran v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
as 5:2022cv00014
Plaintiff:
Rebecca M Beltran
Defendant:
Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
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.
