Cases 11 - 20 of 23
Armstrong-Head v. ProActive Partners Inc. et al
as 3:2017cv00207
Plaintiff:
Eleanor Armstrong-Head
Defendant:
ProActive Partners Inc. , Maxine Vigil Russell and Lawrence Edward Russell
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Danforth v. Williams et al
as 1:2016cv00220
Plaintiff:
Jamie Danforth
Defendant:
FNU Williams, FNU Vigil, FNU LNU and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cordero v. Barron et al
as 6:2016cv00045
Plaintiff:
Adolfo Cordero
Respondent:
Unknown Barron, Unknown Vigil, Andrea Meadows and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Vigil v. Exim Strategies Corporation et al
as 4:2016cv00608
Plaintiff:
Ricardo Vigil
Defendant:
Exim Strategies Corporation and Patrick Donnell
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 5
Cortez v. Mauzey et al
as 1:2014cv00071
Plaintiff:
Walter Cortez
Defendant:
FNU Mauzey, FNU Fourth, FNU Perez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Vigil v. Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc et al
as 3:2012cv03537
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Jane Vigil
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc , Johnson & Johnson, Inc. and Depuy Ortho
Pecial_master:
Special Master
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Progressive Direct Insurance Company v. Vigil et al
as 5:2012cv00092
Plaintiff:
Progressive Direct Insurance Company
Defendant:
Virginia G Vigil, David A Vigil, Sandra Ramos and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Vigil v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
as 3:2012cv00378
Plaintiff:
Stephen Brent Vigil
Defendant:
DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. , Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc. and DOES 1-10, inclusive
Pecial_master:
Special Master
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Vigil v. Edenfield
as 1:2011cv00121
Petitioner:
Ruben Vigil
Respondent:
Karen Edenfield
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Vigil v. Quarterman
as 5:2009cv00025
Petitioner:
Keith Vigil
Respondent:
Nathaniel Quarterman and Nathaniel Quarterman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
