Cases 21 - 30 of 138
Kendrick Sampson v. The City of Los Angeles et al
as 2:2022cv03346
Plaintiff:
Kendrick Sampson
Defendant:
The City of Los Angeles, The City of Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), CHIEF MICHEL MOORE and others
Alternative Dispute Resolution (Adr) Provider:
Richard Copeland
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01763
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv01764
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Kendrick v. Juul Labs, Inc. et al
as 3:2022cv01001
Plaintiff:
Bobby Kendrick
Defendant:
Juul Labs, Inc., Altria Group, Inc., Philip Morris USA, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Ulices Ramales v. Anna Kendrick
as 2:2022cv00731
Plaintiff:
Ulices Ramales
Defendant:
Anna Kendrick
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2021cv01836
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
Fobb v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al
as 4:2021cv07778
Plaintiff:
Fobb Kendrick and Kendrick Fobb
Defendant:
Uber Technologies, Inc., Rasier, LLC and Rasier-CA, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Kellogg v. Wilson
as 3:2021cv00963
Defendant:
Julie Wilson
Plaintiff:
Kendrick Bangs Kellogg
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 bc
Terrance Hayes v. Kendrick Lamar Duckworth et al
as 2:2020cv07649
Plaintiff:
Terrance Hayes
Defendant:
DOES 1 through 10, Josef Leimberg, Kendrick Lamar Duckworth and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Bencomo v. Diaz et al
as 3:2020cv01550
Defendant:
Ralph Diaz, John Doe 3, Daniel Paramo and others
Plaintiff:
Kendrick Bencomo
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.
