Cases 111 - 120 of 27,892
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00816
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2024cv01771
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Springer v. Heating & Air Conditioning Services, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv00059
Defendant:
Michael Edge, Heating & Air Conditioning Services, Inc., Robert Dwayne Edge and others
Plaintiff:
Alexander Springer
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Reents v. Medguard Alert, Inc.
as 1:2024cv07156
Plaintiff:
Alexander Reents
Defendant:
Medguard Alert, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2024cv03251
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Crannell et al v. Saratoga County et al
as 1:2024cv00993
Plaintiff:
Michael P. Lloyd and Bradley W. Crannell
Defendant:
Saratoga County Sheriff's Department, Saratoga County and Saratoga County Sheriff Deputy Alexander Roney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Pamon v. United States Postal Service et al
as 3:2024cv02061
Defendant:
Does 1-25, Alexander J Cleger, United States Postal Service and others
Plaintiff:
Dionne M Pamon
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1030 Computer Fraud & Abuse Act
Odom Industries v. Sipcam Agro
as 24-60410
Plaintiff:
Alexander Odom, Donna S. Odom, Odom Industries, Incorporated and others
Defendant:
Sipcam Agro USA, Incorporated and Sipcam Agro Solutions, L.L.C.
Tavo Simmons v. E. Martin Estrada
as 2:2024cv07092
Defendant:
Vanover, Natasha Alexander-Mingo, Chad Whiteford and others
Plaintiff:
Tavo Simmons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 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.
