Cases 11 - 20 of 7,948
Emiabata, et al. v. Bank of New York Mellon, et al.
as 24-3424
Plaintiff:
PHILIP EMIABATA and SYLVIA EMIABATA
Defendant:
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, also named as Bank of New York Trust Company, SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING, LLC, JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. and others
Cook v. County of Maricopa, et al.
as 24-3426
Plaintiff:
SEANTAIN COOK
Defendant:
COUNTY OF MARICOPA, CENTURION MEDICAL SERVICES, ITORO ELIJAH and others
Doe v. United States District Court for the Central District of California
as 24-3422
Interested Party:
ANASTASSIA KREZOUB, Sylvia Kass and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Petitioner:
JOHN DOE
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Goode v. Canedo, et al.
as 24-3448
Plaintiff:
BENJAMIN DENNIS GOODE
Defendant:
J. CANEDO, Then, Correctional Sergeant; Now, Correctional Lieutenant, JOHN AND JANE DOES, 1-100, Correctional Staff and J. CANEJO
Patacsil, et al. v. Google LLC, et al.
as 24-3387
Plaintiff:
NAPOLEON PATACSIL, individually, and on behalf of other persons similarly situated, GEORGE JACK, MARK CARSON and others
Appellant:
JOHN ANDREN, MATTHEW LILLEY and JOSEPH S. ST. JOHN
Defendant:
GOOGLE LLC, XXVI HOLDINGS INC and ALPHABET INC.
Banta v. Hayashi, et al.
as 24-3324
Plaintiff:
HUNTER BANTA, Individually and on behalf of his minor son, I.B.
Defendant:
KEITH HAYASHI, KENNETH S. FINK, M.D., JOHN AND JANE DOES, 1-25 and others
Farnum v. LeGrand, et al.
as 24-3316
Petitioner:
JOHN MICHAEL FARNUM
Respondent:
ROBERT LEGRAND, Warden and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Henneberry v. City of Newark, et al.
as 24-3300
Plaintiff:
JOHN PATRICK HENNEBERRY
Defendant:
CITY OF NEWARK, KARL FREDSTROM, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA and others
Dudley v. Boise State University, et al.
as 24-3233
Plaintiff:
CHELSEY DUDLEY
Defendant:
BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY, TONY ROARK, in his official and individual capacity, MANDY NELSON, in her official and individual capacity and others
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.
