Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv04200
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv03803
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01716
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01546
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 1:2016cv01264
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv01264
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Rodriguez v. Smith et al
as 1:2016cv00107
Defendant:
Abilene Motor Express and Timothy James Smith
Plaintiff:
Jesus Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Auto Negligence
Smith v. Merck & Co., Inc. et al
as 1:2014cv03976
Defendant:
Merck & Co., Inc. and Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
Plaintiff:
James Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Ceparano v. Suffolk County, NY et al
as 2:2010cv02030
Defendant:
P.O. "John Doe's #'s 10-50", "Supervisor of Bradford S. Magill", "Supervisor of Patricia Brosco" and others
Plaintiff:
Anthony J. Ceparano
MADD:
Mother's Against Drunk Driving
Peeping Pervert:
Cathy Ryan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Smith v. City of New York et al
as 1:2008cv04647
Plaintiff:
James Smith
Defendant:
City of New York, John Doe #1-3 and Richard Roes #4-6
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.
