Cases 11 - 20 of 25,198
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2024cv00207
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 24-1243
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Espinoza Sarmiento v. Rodriguez Monteiro
as 24-1530
Plaintiff:
LUIS ALBERTO ESPINOZA SARMIENTO, individually, on behalf of all others similarly situated, GEOVANI PEREZ, individually, on behalf of all others similarly situated, ALFREDO PEREZ, individually, on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Defendant:
MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ MONTEIRO, as an individual
Carl Puckett, Jr., et al v. Ain Jeem, Inc., et al
as 24-5537
Plaintiff:
CARL ELLEN PUCKETT, JR. and MARCELLA PUCKETT
Defendant:
AIN JEEM, INC., CHRIS STAVRO, DEBORAH MORALES and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00866
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Perez v. Quiros et al
as 3:2024cv00651
Plaintiff:
Ometrius Perez
Defendant:
Angel Quiros, Connecticut Department of Correction, Colleen Gallager and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv04697
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
VARGAS-PEREZ et al
as 3:2024cv01256
Plaintiff:
NOEL VARGAS-PEREZ and HON. DENNIS RICHARD MCDONOUGH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Batista Martinez v. Perez Bryant et al
as 6:2024cv01033
Plaintiff:
Juan Batista Martinez
Defendant:
Artavia Perez Bryant and CH2 Logistics, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence
Perez-Chuello v. Garland
as 24-3508
Petitioner:
EYBBER JAVIER PEREZ-CHUELLO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
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.
