Cases 11 - 20 of 334
Esquivel-Luna v. Marion County Jail et al
as 6:2023cv01923
Plaintiff:
Jesus Javier Esquivel-Luna
Defendant:
Marion County Jail and Marion County Sheriff Office
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02957
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023at01289
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Esquivel-Luna v. Marion County Sheriff Department
as 6:2023cv01836
Plaintiff:
Jesus Javier Esquivel-Luna
Defendant:
Marion County Sheriff Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv10022
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv01797
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Daniel Gary Esquivel v. Rob St. Andre
as 2:2023cv09946
Petitioner:
Daniel Gary Esquivel
Respondent:
Rob St. Andre
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Esquivel v. Garland
as 23-3454
Petitioner:
UBEN ALBERTO ESQUIVEL
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Ortiz-Esquivel v. Garland
as 23-3429
Petitioner:
JOSE LUIS ORTIZ-ESQUIVEL
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Humberto Morales et al v. WinCo Holdings, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv09300
Plaintiff:
Humberto Esquivel Morales, Advanced Weight Loss Surgical Association, Minimally Invasive Surgical Association and others
Defendant:
Winco Holdings, Inc. and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Labor/Mgmnt. Relations
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.
