Cases 81 - 90 of 1,929
Black et al v. Goldman et al
as 1:2023cv01119
Plaintiff:
Siva D. Black, Santo Daime Vine Cult and Federation Santo Daime
Defendant:
Jonathan Goldman, Church of the Holy Light of the Queen and Essential Light Institute
United States of America v. Santos-Garcia
as 23-1580
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
WALTER OSVALDO SANTOS-GARCIA
Santos Ramos, et al. v. Garland
as 23-1539
Petitioner:
MARITZA ESTELA SANTOS RAMOS and CARLOS IVAN RAMOS SANTOS
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Gallagher v. City and County of San Francisco et al
as 3:2023cv03579
Plaintiff:
Patrick Gallagher
Defendant:
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Bernard Curran, Rodrigo Santos and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Noriega v. Marschke et al
as 3:2023cv08502
Plaintiff:
Santos G Noriega
Defendant:
R Marschke, Diane Miller and GEO Group
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv05534
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Santos v. Kijakazi
as 3:2023cv01253
Plaintiff:
Gerardo Santos
Defendant:
Kilolo Kijakazi
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 wc Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
City of Pontiac Reestablished General Employees' Retirement System v. Black et al
as 3:2023cv03366
Plaintiff:
City of Pontiac Reestablished General Employees' Retirement System
Defendant:
Steven D. Black, Mark A. Chancy, Celeste A. Clark and others
Williams v. Santos et al
as 3:2023cv00312
Plaintiff:
Michael Leon Williams
Defendant:
Danilo Santos, Miller, Harris and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023mc80174
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
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.
