Cases 31 - 40 of 40
Thomas Souran, et al v. Grubhub Holdings, Inc., et al
as 19-2156
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CARMEN GONZALEZ, ROY WILKIE, KELLY REARDON and others
Defendant / Appellee:
GRUBHUB, INC. and GRUBHUB HOLDINGS, INC.
Marshall v. Grubhub Inc.
as 1:2019cv03718
Defendant:
Grubhub Inc.
Plaintiff:
Donna Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Carmen Wallace, et al v. Grubhub Holdings, Inc., et al
as 19-1564
Defendant / Appellee:
GRUBHUB, INC. and GRUBHUB HOLDINGS, INC.
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CARMEN WALLACE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and BRODERICK BRYANT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Cisneros Portillo et al v. Grubhub, Inc. et al
as 1:2018cv00873
Petitioner:
Miguel Cisneros Portillo , Cesar Tenorio , Eugenio Ortega Vasquez and others
Respondent:
Grubhub, Inc. and Great Lakes NY, NY, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv00165
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
Altman v. GrubHub Inc
as 2:2017cv01926
Plaintiff:
Natalya Altman
Defendant:
GrubHub Inc
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227
Najera et al v. Grubhub, Inc.
as 1:2017cv02978
Petitioner:
Prisco Najera , Israel Fuentes , Cristobal Bravo and others
Respondent:
Grubhub, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Amodeo v. GrubHub Inc.
as 1:2017cv01284
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Amodeo
Defendant:
GrubHub Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Flores v. Grubhub Inc.
as 1:2016cv05105
Plaintiff:
Victoria Flores
Defendant:
Grubhub Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Illinois Nut & Candy Home of Fantasia Confections, LLC v. Grubhub, Inc. et al
as 1:2014cv00949
Plaintiff:
Illinois Nut & Candy Home of Fantasia Confections, LLC
Defendant:
Grubhub, Inc. and Grubhub Seamless, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
