Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Shah et al v. Spirit Airlines, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv21143
Plaintiff:
Kartik Shah, Purvi Shah and A. S.
Defendant:
Spirit Airlines, Inc. and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
CHANGE LENDING, LLC v. CHAMPIONS FUNDING, LLC et al
as 1:2022cv21511
Plaintiff:
CHANGE LENDING, LLC
Defendant:
CHAMPIONS FUNDING, LLC, DENIS Garvan Kelly and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Marlene Boyadjian v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC et al
as 9:2021cv82533
Plaintiff:
Marlene Boyadjian
Defendant:
GlaxoSmithKline LLC, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi U.S. Services Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Justina Carrasco v. Robinhood Financial LLC et al
as 1:2021cv22702
Plaintiff:
Justina Carrasco
Defendant:
Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Markets, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Orbis Opportunity Fund, LP et al v. Boyer et al
as 1:2019cv24689
Defendant:
David Alan Boyer, DOES 1 through 50 inclusive, Paul Michael Pickett and others
Plaintiff:
Opportunity Fund (Cayman), LP and Orbis Opportunity Fund, LP
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1109
Dassa et al v. Vizio Holdings, Inc. et al
as 9:2016cv80130
Plaintiff:
Steven Dassa and Benjamin Hinerfeld
Defendant:
Vizio Holdings, Inc. , Vizio, Inc. , Vizio Inscape Services, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
DACHILLE v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al
as 1:2009cv23072
Plaintiff:
DANIEL DACHILLE and LAROSE FLORIST, INC.
Defendant:
Bank of America, N.A., Bank of America Corp. and JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 50
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Winston v. Veras et al
as 1:2007cv22779
Plaintiff:
Glenn B. Winston
Defendant:
Luis Antonio Veras, Luis Alberto Veras, Harold Pantaleon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
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.
