Cases 11 - 17 of 17
Espinoza et al v. Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P., et al
as 1:2014cv20756
Plaintiff:
Jorge E. Espinoza and Silvia Espinoza
Defendant:
Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P. , Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. , Bank of America, N.A. and others
Counter_claimant:
Fannie Mae , Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P. , Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. and others
Counter_defendant:
Jorge E. Espinoza and Silvia Espinoza
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Garcia et al v. Pit Stop Gas, Inc. et al
as 9:2010cv81014
Plaintiff:
Armando Garcia and Jorge A. Espinoza
Defendant:
Pit Stop Gas, Inc. and Jay Goldwasser
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
United States of America v. Espinoza-Ortiz
as 10-3432
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant - Appellant:
Jaime Espinoza-Ortiz, AKA Jorge Ortiz-Espinoza, AKA Jorge Ramos Reyes, AKA Edward Alvarado, AKA Eddy Ortiz, AKA Eduardo Ortiz, AKA Eduardo Francisco Rolando, AKA Jamie Ortiz, AKA Edi Rolando Ortiz
Espinoza v. People of The State of California
as 2:2009cv02049
Petitioner:
Jorge Rebego Espinoza
Respondent:
People of The State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Espinoza v. People of The State of California
as 1:2009cv01417
Petitioner:
Jorge Rebego Espinoza
Respondent:
People of The State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Perez-Espinoza v. Cherry et al
as 1:2007cv01026
Petitioner:
Jorge Perez-Espinoza
Respondent:
Roy W. Cherry, Mary Loiselle, John P. Torres and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Espinoza v. Mark's Creative Landscape, Inc. et al
as 1:2007cv03839
Plaintiff:
Jorge Armando Espinoza, Jorge Armando Espinoza and Jorge Armando Espinoza
Defendant:
Mark's Creative Landscape, Inc. and Mark Podlesak
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
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.
