Cases 1 - 10 of 61
Li et al v. CITY OF CHICAGO et al
as 1:2023cv15485
Plaintiff:
Dongping Li, Xiaozhen Mai, Patrick McGuire and others
Defendant:
CITY OF CHICAGO, Mayor Brandon Johnson, Commissioner Matthew Beaudet and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2020cv09362
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Ernesto Martinez v. County of Riverside et al
as 5:2020cv00007
Defendant:
Benjamin Seagraves, John Weitzel, County of Riverside and others
Plaintiff:
Ernesto Martinez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv00363
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv24779
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12182
Martinez v. The Graham Companies
as 1:2015cv23604
Plaintiff:
Jose Ernesto Martinez
Defendant:
The Graham Companies
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12182
Solano et al v. Foxman et al
as 6:2015cv01409
Plaintiff:
Leonard J. Solano and Valen C. Solano
Defendant:
James Foxman, I, James Foxman, III, Hubert L. Grimes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Martinez v. Internal Services Department of Miami Dade County et al
as 1:2014cv22874
Plaintiff:
Jose Ernesto Martinez
Defendant:
Internal Services Department of Miami Dade County and Lester Sola
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12182
Martinez v. United States Development, Ltd.
as 1:2013cv22430
Plaintiff:
Jose Ernesto Martinez
Defendant:
United States Development, Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12182 Americans with Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv01007
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
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.
