Cases 31 - 40 of 1,755
Aguilar Estrada v. Garland
as 24-2532
Petitioner:
ERASMO AGUILAR ESTRADA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Sigman v. County of San Joaquin et al
as 2:2024cv01158
Plaintiff:
Danny Richard Sigman
Defendant:
County of San Joaquin, Tawni Hoskins, Joshua Kelley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv03142
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Burnell v. Montgomery et al
as 3:2024cv00683
Plaintiff:
Joe Baby Burnell
Defendant:
W. Montgomery, Ali Hasan, B. Lew and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Estrada-Castaneda v. Garland
as 24-2258
Petitioner:
ERIKA L. ESTRADA-CASTANEDA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Maria Angelica Jimenez-Estrada v. Martin O Malley
as 2:2024cv02923
Plaintiff:
Maria Angelica Jimenez-Estrada
Defendant:
Commissioner of SS Martin O'Malley and Martin O Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Delgado, et al. v. ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan
as 24-1845
Plaintiff:
ANGELINA BOWEN DELGADO, ROBIN BECERRA, STEVE BOZAN and others
Defendant:
ILWU-PMA WELFARE PLAN, an employee health and welfare plan under he Employee Retirement Income Security Act
Medina-Ventura, et al. v. Garland
as 24-1651
Petitioner:
DORA ISABEL MEDINA-VENTURA and MIA KIMBERLY ESTRADA-MEDINA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Jesus Eric Carasco v. E. Martin Estrada et al
as 8:2024cv00584
Plaintiff:
Jesus Eric Carasco
Defendant:
E. Martin Estrada and United States
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
Estrada v. Laxhmi Transport Incorporated et al
as 2:2024cv00535
Plaintiff:
Diego Fernando Moir Estrada
Defendant:
Laxhmi Transport Incorporated and Rohtash Rohtash
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
