Cases 31 - 40 of 77
Daniel Flores v. Nancy A. Berryhill
as 2:2018cv06303
Defendant:
Commissioner Social Security and Nancy A. Berryhill
Plaintiff:
Daniel Flores
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Flores v. Ryan et al
as 4:2018cv00315
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Arizona and Charles L Ryan
Petitioner:
James Daniel Flores
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Daniel Flores v. BMW of North America, LLC et al
as 2:2018cv03480
Defendant:
BMW of North America, LLC and Does
Plaintiff:
Daniel Flores
Daniel Flores v. R. Barne
as 18-55344
Petitioner - Appellant:
DANIEL FLORES
Respondent - Appellee:
R. BARNES, Warden
Flores v. Ryan et al
as 4:2017cv00120
Petitioner:
James Daniel Flores
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Flores v. National Van Lines, Inc. et al
as 3:2017cv00003
Defendant:
Finkbiner Transfer & Storage, Inc., Gary M. Gallardo, National Holding Company, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Daniel Flores
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Flores v. Janssen Research & Development LLC f/k/a Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development LLC et al
as 2:2016cv07992
Plaintiff:
Daniel Flores
Defendant:
Janssen Research & Development LLC, Janssen Ortho LLC, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Flores v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
as 2:2016cv00019
Plaintiff:
Daniel Flores
Defendant:
Union Pacific Railroad Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
DeSanto et al v. Wilk et al
as 1:2015cv10892
Plaintiff:
Anthony E. DeSanto and James M DeSanto
Defendant:
Jennifer Wilk, Raymond Paton, David Harrison and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv07167
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
