Cases 41 - 50 of 852
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv01564
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
USA v. Romero-Trejo
as 23-50624
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Noel Romero-Trejo
USA v. Romero-Trejo
as 23-50622
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Noel Romero-Trejo
Romero v. Social Security
as 6:2023cv01165
Plaintiff:
Ricky J Romero
Defendant:
U S Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Smith v. Adams et al
as 5:2023cv00134
Plaintiff:
Franklin Smith
Defendant:
FNU Adams, Vincent Romero and FNU LNU 5:23-CV-134-C
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gates et al v. City of Biloxi, Mississippi
as 1:2022cv00356
Plaintiff:
Derrick Gates, Robert Hornsby, Cory Mooney and others
Defendant:
City of Biloxi, Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Patience v. Jackson
as 23-20270
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Wen Lian Patience
Defendant / Appellee:
Shannon Jackson, Montgomery County District Attorney's Department DA, Lee Romero and others
Nixon v. United States of America
as 4:2023cv00599
Petitioner:
Romero Robles Nixon and Nixon Leonel Romero Robles
Respondent:
United States of America and Warden at FMC-Fort Worth
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Romero v. Rodriguez Hernandez et al
as 4:2023cv02009
Plaintiff:
Jose Romero
Defendant:
Alexander Rodriguez Hernandez, Oscar Freight Services, LLC. and Wilfredo Arleis Matos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Hernandez v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 3:2023cv01215
Petitioner:
Carlos Romero Hernandez
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
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.
