Cases 91 - 100 of 100
Carby v. United States Parcel Service et al
as 2:2026cv00162
Plaintiff:
Caryl Danita Carby
Defendant:
United States Parcel Service, Kristi Noem and George Walker Bush, Jr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1339 Postal matters
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv00160
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 vc Fed. Question: Violation of Constitutional Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01165
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Janics v. United States of America et al
as 2:2026cv01154
Plaintiff:
Christopher Janics
Defendant:
United States of America and TOTE Services LLC
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688 Jones Act
Barber v. State of Washington et al
as 3:2026cv05354
Plaintiff:
Danny Joe Barber, III
Defendant:
State of Washington, Jen Shall Jenkins, Carlos Lozoya and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01129
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv05330
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01119
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01117
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01090
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
