Cases 31 - 40 of 743
Komatsu v. The City of New York
as 23-946
Petitioner:
Towaki Komatsu
Respondent:
The City of New York, Howard Redmond, NYPD Inspector, sued in individual and official capacities, Ralph Nieves, former NYPD Lieutenant, sued in individual and official capacities and others
Landwer v. Santana et al
as 1:2023cv03903
Plaintiff:
Charles H. Landwer
Defendant:
Eliezer Santana, Arbruster Habel and John Doe I
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
University of Puerto Rico Retirement Board v. University of Puerto Rico et al
as 3:2023cv01326
Plaintiff:
University of Puerto Rico Retirement Board
Defendant:
University of Puerto Rico and Ricardo Dalmau-Santana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Valle-Santana v. Garland
as 23-9555
Petitioner:
DANIEL VALLE-SANTANA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00174
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
USA v. Toye Tutis
as 23-1796
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
TOYE TUTIS, a/k/a "AHMAD", a/k/a "MAHD", a/k/a "SANTANA"
US v. Santana-Gonzalez
as 23-1378
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant / Appellant:
VICTOR SANTANA-GONZALEZ, a/k/a Run Run, a/k/a Pequeno
Aguilar et al v. The Republic of the Sudan
as 1:2023cv03246
Plaintiff:
Maria Alayo Aguilar, Josefina Blanchard, Flordaliza Espinal and others
Defendant:
The Republic of the Sudan
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2333 Civil Remedies: Anti-Terrorism Act of 1991
United States v. Marlin Thomas
as 23-1780
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Marlin Santana Thomas
US v. Recarey-Salas, et al
as 23-1304
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant / Appellant:
ROBERTO RECAREY-SALAS
Interested Party:
ESTATE OF ALBERTO AVILES, SCOTIABANK DE PUERTO RICO, ALFONSA RODRIGUEZ-CHAPARRO and others
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.
