Cases 51 - 60 of 1,981
Abrams v. National Park Service et al
as 2:2024cv01178
Plaintiff:
Adam C. Abrams
Defendant:
National Park Service, Debra Haaland and Alexcy Romero
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Romero Romero v. Garland
as 24-743
Petitioner:
NECTALI ULISES ROMERO ROMERO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00058
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Almidon-Miranda, et al. v. Garland
as 24-634
Petitioner:
GEORGE BRIAN ALMIDON-MIRANDA, YESENIA L ROMERO-ZUNIGA and GAHELA L ROMERO-ZUNIGA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Marker v. New Mexico House of Representatives et al
as 1:2024cv00118
Petitioner:
Larry Marker
Respondent:
New Mexico House of Representatives, Eliseo Alcon, Anthony Allison and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00052
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Warren v. City of Henderson, et al.
as 24-490
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALLANNA WARREN
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF HENDERSON, HENDERSON POLICE DEPARTMENT, HOLLIE CHADWICK, Henderson Police Department Chief of Police and others
ROMERO v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2024vv00127
Petitioner:
PEGGY LYNN ROMERO
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
Velasco Vilchez, et al. v. Garland
as 24-456
Petitioner:
NATALY AURORA VELASCO VILCHEZ, GIANVICTOR IVAN ROMERO JUAREZ and MATEO VALENTINO ROMERO VELASCO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Eliason v. Department of Justice, The et al
as 2:2024cv00064
Plaintiff:
Brett L. Eliason
Defendant:
Department of Justice, The, Cecilia M Romero and Sean Reyes
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
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.
