Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Orosco v. Perez et al
as 5:2021cv00890
Plaintiff:
Andrew Orosco, Jr.
Defendant:
Christopher Perez, Any Other Agency with this Case and Person's who Accompany with Christopher Perez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Orosco v. Davis
as 5:2018cv01075
Petitioner:
Rocky Leandro Orosco
Respondent:
Lorie Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Orosco v. Maefield Development Corporation
as 4:2018cv00037
Defendant:
Maefield Development Corporation
Plaintiff:
Jesus Orosco
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Troy Orosco v. Chalk Mountain Services of Texas, LLC
as 5:2017cv00682
Defendant:
Chalk Mountaiin Services of Texas, LLC
Plaintiff:
Troy Orosco
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2015cv00059
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Orosco v. Ovation Lending
as 5:2014cv00897
Plaintiff:
David Leonard Orosco
Defendant:
Ovation Lending, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601 Truth in Lending
Winberg v. Felts et al
as 4:2014cv00004
Defendant:
Arnold Felts, Clinton Fielder, Arturo Granado and others
Plaintiff:
Don Winberg
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Snell v. Smith et al
as 5:2008cv00280
Plaintiff:
Johnnie Earl Snell, Sr.
Defendant:
Shalanda R. Smith, Malcolm Kallid Darnell Smith, Bertha Smith and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Sovereign Establishment of Religion Devotion Christian Ministries non Denomination Community of Jesus Christ et al v. State of Texas
as 5:2007cv00176
Plaintiff:
Sovereign Establishment of Religion and Robert Gonzales Votion
Defendant:
State of Texas, Donna S. Rayes, Linda J. Orosco and others
Counter Plaintiff:
Gerry Rickhoff
Counter Defendant:
Sovereign Establishment of Religion and Robert Gonzales Votion
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
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.
