Cases 21 - 30 of 30
Polo Villalobos v. USA
as 2:2012cv00025
Petitioner:
Jose Miguel Polo Villalobos
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Hsu v. Benov
as 1:2011cv01683
Petitioner:
Polo Shu Hsu
Respondent:
Michael L. Benov
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Daulys Chico-Polo v. Embarq Payphone Services, Inco, et al
as 11-1427
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAULYS CHICO-POLO
Defendant - Appellee:
EMBARQ PAYPHONE SERVICES, INCOPORATED, MICHAEL HYNES, MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and others
MURAKUSH CALIPHATES OF AMEXEM v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 1:2011cv01317
Plaintiff:
MURAKUSH CALIPHATE OF AMEXEM INC.
Defendant:
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, SEVERAL UNKNOWN NJ STATE POLICE OFFICERS, BURLINGTON COUNTY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jackson v. Executive Office for United St
as 10-3968
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Sharon Jackson
Defendant - Appellee:
County of Rockland, Village of Spring Valley, Department of Justice and others
Chico-Polo et al v. Embarq Payphone Services, Incoporated et al
as 2:2010cv10758
Plaintiff:
Daulys Chico-Polo and Royman Chico
Defendant:
Embarq Payphone Services, Incoporated, Michael Hynes, Michigan Department of Corrections and others
Guerra v. United States of America
as 4:2009cv00280
Petitioner:
Polo Rico Guerra
Respondent:
United States of America and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Polo v. ICE
as 2:2008cv01026
Plaintiff:
Enrique Diaz Polo
Defendant:
ICE
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
NEMES v. KORNGUT et al
as 1:2008cv02814
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY NEMES
Defendant:
LEWIS KORNGUT, EDWARD NEAFSY, GRETA GOODWIN BROWN and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Wyatt v. State of California et al
as 5:2007cv01643
Petitioner:
Hansan Balial Wyatt
Respondent:
State of California and Mike Polos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
