Cases 11 - 20 of 290
Bushansky v. 1Life Healthcare, Inc. et al
as 3:2022cv04978
Plaintiff:
Stephen Bushansky
Defendant:
1Life Healthcare, Inc., Paul R. Auvil, Mark S. Blumenkranz and others
Maria Ann Sartor et al v. County of Riverside et al
as 5:2022cv01410
Plaintiff:
MARI ANN SARTOR and ROY EUGENE JACKSON
Defendant:
County of Riverside, ROBERT CARRASCO and Does 1-15, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
GPPI, INC. v. O'Neill et al
as 3:2022cv03678
Plaintiff:
GPPI, INC.
Defendant:
Mary Ann O'Neill, Jimbo Gymnastics, Inc., Gymbelle Gymnastics, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2022cv01171
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Miramon v. Monsanto Company
as 3:2022cv02491
Plaintiff:
Mary Anne Miramon
Defendant:
Monsanto Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Nelson v. Allison et al
as 3:2022cv00377
Plaintiff:
Natasha Hilda Nelson and James Daniel Nelson
Defendant:
Kathleen Allison, Connie Gibson, Marcus Pollard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
(PS) Shao v. Roberts, et al.
as 2:2022cv00325
Plaintiff:
Yi Tai Shao and Linda Shao
Defendant:
John G. Roberts, Jr., Anthony M. Kennedy, Stephen Breyer and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
v. SHAO et al
as 2:2022at00196
Defendant:
Yi Tai SHAO, John G. Roberts, Jr., Anthony M Kennedy and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Lovoi v. Weisler et al
as 4:2022cv00254
Plaintiff:
Gerald Lovoi
Defendant:
Dion J. Weisler, Catherine A. Lesjak, Enrique Lores and others
Nguon v. Glynn et al
as 3:2021cv02113
Plaintiff:
Hung Duong Nguon
Defendant:
Mary Anne Glynn, Steven Roberts, John Hodges and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
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.
