Cases 31 - 40 of 2,459
Ramos v. Tafoya
as 1:2024cv00682
Defendant:
Alisha Tafoya, I. Jacobo and C Wilkens
Plaintiff:
Jesse John Ramos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Yung v. City of New York et al
as 1:2024cv05182
Defendant:
P.O. Ramos, City of New York, P.O. #3 and others
Plaintiff:
John Yung
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Re et al v. Atlanta Federal Prison et al
as 1:2024cv02947
Defendant:
Warden Thomas and Atlanta Federal Prison
Plaintiff:
Noe Reyes Lucero, Flavio Ramos, Jahvaris Reege and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ramos v. Jaime et al
as 5:2024cv00734
Respondent:
Felipe Jaime and United States Attorney General
Petitioner:
Sandalio Ramos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Ramos-Vasquez, Anibal v. Miami FDC
as 1:2024cv22488
Plaintiff:
Anibal Ramos-Vasquez
Defendant:
Miami FDC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
USA v. Tapia
as 24-10573
Defendant:
Rosalio Ramos Tapia, also known as Rosalio Ramos, also known as Chale, also known as Mocho
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Peralta v. McCarthy et al
as 1:2024cv04767
Defendant:
Daniel T. McCarthy and Robert T. Johnson
Plaintiff:
Jose Fernandez Ramos Peralta
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv07083
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Ramos v. Gonzalez et al
as 2:2024cv02140
Defendant:
Bonnie J Smith, . Gonzalez, Jody Leonard and others
Plaintiff:
Jacob Ramos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ramos v. Danner et al
as 2:2024cv02141
Defendant:
Ellen Hayes, Kim Danner and Becky Shirley
Plaintiff:
Jacob Ramos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
