Cases 21 - 30 of 136
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03663
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Pacella v. Hesai Group et al
as 1:2023cv02634
Plaintiff:
Alan Pacella
Defendant:
Hesai Group, Yifan Li, Louis T. Hsieh and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77 Securities Fraud
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv02353
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 1:2023cv02101
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 1:2023cv01297
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 1:2022cv07675
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Linn v. Katz et al
as 2:2022cv07102
Plaintiff:
Richard Linn and Dr. Richard Linn
Defendant:
Alan Bruce Katz, Jonathan S Katz, INPRO PROPERTIES CORP. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv06907
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Radix et al v. Kensington International, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv06632
Plaintiff:
Cheryl Radix, Julian Carrington, Audra Heaven and others
Defendant:
Kensington International, Inc., John Gelin, Eyan Edwards and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv04126
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
