Cases 21 - 30 of 34
Smith v. Dejong et al
as 4:2014cv00546
Plaintiff:
Yolanda Smith
Defendant:
Daniel Dejong and Daniel Blum
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv09183
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Velarde et al v. City of Union City et al
as 3:2013cv04011
Plaintiff:
Aaron Velarde , Devin Velarde , Arthur Velarde and others
Defendant:
City of Union City, Union City Police Department, Andrew Gannam and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bankers Life and Casuality Company et al v. Crofton et al
as 1:2013cv01121
Plaintiff:
Bankers Life and Casuality Company
Defendant:
Donald A Crofton, Cesar M Dablo, Jr., Ronald P DeJong and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Nguyen v. City of Union City et al
as 4:2013cv01753
Plaintiff:
Tien Van Nguyen
Defendant:
City of Union City , Brian Baumgartner , Manny Leon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Everett Winter, et al v. Snohomish County, et al
as 11-35380
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EVERETT N WINTER, SAM DEJONG and ANNE DEJONG, husband and wife
Defendant - Appellee:
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, a Washington Municipality, SNOHOMISH COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, a department within the municipality, SNOHOMISH COUNTY CODE DEPARTMENT, a division of the planning department and others
Winter et al
as 2:2010cv01778
Defendant:
Snohomish County and Penny Skovold
Plaintiff:
Everett N Winter , Sam DeJong and Anne DeJong
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 10-55769
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2010cv00402
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2009cv06077
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
