Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Ible v. Maplebear Inc.,
as 0:2024cv60406
Defendant:
Maplebear Inc., and Instacart
Plaintiff:
Ishanna Ible
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
Alvarez v. Maplebear, Inc. et al
as 3:2021cv30110
Plaintiff:
Jorge L. Alvarez
Defendant:
Maplebear, Inc. doing business as Instacart and DoorDash, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Levine v. Maplebear, Inc.
as 1:2021cv11617
Plaintiff:
Stephen Levine
Defendant:
Maplebear, Inc. doing business as Instacart
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Chambers v. Maplebear, Inc.
as 1:2021cv07114
Plaintiff:
Joseph Chambers
Defendant:
Maplebear, Inc. doing business as Instacart
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Eno v. Maplebear, Inc.
as 1:2021cv03371
Plaintiff:
Eric Enco and Eric Eno
Defendant:
Maplebear, Inc. doing business as Instacart
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
Bolin v. Maplebear, Inc. et al
as 2:2020cv05945
Defendant:
Maplebear, Inc., Maplebear, Inc. doing business as Instacart and Does 1 through 100 Inclusive
Plaintiff:
Shanda Bolin
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Casey Bailey, et. al. v. Maplebear, Inc.
as 4:2020cv07677
Plaintiff:
Casey Bailey, Jennfier Wicklund, Curtis Smith and others
Defendant:
Maplebear, Inc dba Instacart and Maplebear, Inc doing business as Instacart
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Lopez v. Maplebear, Inc.
as 1:2020cv04064
Plaintiff:
Nieves Lopez
Defendant:
Maplebear, Inc. doing business as Instacart
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
O'Shea et al v. Maplebear, Inc., et al
as 1:2019cv06994
Plaintiff:
Brian Posner, Katherine O'Shea and Tom Bacon
Defendant:
"Does" 1 Through 100, Inclusive, Maplebear, Inc., d/b/a Instacart, Maplebear, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Moton v. Maplebear Inc.
as 17-1082
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Herbert Moton
Defendant - Appellee:
Maplebear Inc., DBA Instacart
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.
